Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Muscle activation assessment

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Muscle activation assessment: Effects of method, stimulus number, and joint angle

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Muscle activation assessment : Effects of method, stimulus number, and joint angle. / Bampouras, Theodoros M.; Reeves, Neil D.; Baltzopoulos, Vasilios; Maganaris, Constantinos N.

In: Muscle and Nerve, Vol. 34, No. 6, 01.12.2006, p. 740-746.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

Bampouras, TM, Reeves, ND, Baltzopoulos, V & Maganaris, CN 2006, 'Muscle activation assessment: Effects of method, stimulus number, and joint angle', Muscle and Nerve, vol. 34, no. 6, pp. 740-746. https://doi.org/10.1002/mus.20610

APA

Bampouras, T. M., Reeves, N. D., Baltzopoulos, V., & Maganaris, C. N. (2006). Muscle activation assessment: Effects of method, stimulus number, and joint angle. Muscle and Nerve, 34(6), 740-746. https://doi.org/10.1002/mus.20610

Vancouver

Bampouras TM, Reeves ND, Baltzopoulos V, Maganaris CN. Muscle activation assessment: Effects of method, stimulus number, and joint angle. Muscle and Nerve. 2006 Dec 1;34(6):740-746. https://doi.org/10.1002/mus.20610

Author

Bampouras, Theodoros M. ; Reeves, Neil D. ; Baltzopoulos, Vasilios ; Maganaris, Constantinos N. / Muscle activation assessment : Effects of method, stimulus number, and joint angle. In: Muscle and Nerve. 2006 ; Vol. 34, No. 6. pp. 740-746.

Bibtex

@article{61e3297e14bf460789ad2d5b0e9be869,
title = "Muscle activation assessment: Effects of method, stimulus number, and joint angle",
abstract = "Activation capacity has traditionally been assessed using the interpolated twitch technique (ITT) and central activation ratio (CAR). However, the quantitative agreement of the two methods and the physiological mechanisms underpinning any possible differences have not been fully elucidated. The aim of this study was to compare and assess the sensitivity of the ITT and CAR to potential errors introduced by (1) evoking inadequate force, by manipulating the number of stimuli, and (2) neglecting differences in series elasticity between conditions, by manipulating joint angle. Ten subjects performed knee extension contractions at 30° and 90° knee-joint angles during which the ITT and CAR methods were applied using 1, 2, 4, and 8 electrical stimuli. Joint angle influenced the ITT outcome with higher values taken at 90° (P < 0.05), while the number of stimuli influenced the CAR outcome with a higher number of stimuli yielding lower values (P < 0.05). For any given joint angle and stimulus number, the CAR method produced higher activation values than the ITT method by 8%-16%. Therefore, in the quantification of voluntary drive with the ITT and CAR methods consideration should be given not only to the number of stimuli applied but also to the effect of series elasticity due to joint-angle differences, since these factors may differently affect the outcome of the calculation, depending on the approach followed.",
keywords = "Central activation ratio, Electrical stimulation, Interpolated twitch technique, Maximum voluntary contraction, Series elastic component",
author = "Bampouras, {Theodoros M.} and Reeves, {Neil D.} and Vasilios Baltzopoulos and Maganaris, {Constantinos N.}",
year = "2006",
month = dec,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1002/mus.20610",
language = "English",
volume = "34",
pages = "740--746",
journal = "Muscle and Nerve",
issn = "0148-639X",
publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Inc.",
number = "6",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Muscle activation assessment

T2 - Effects of method, stimulus number, and joint angle

AU - Bampouras, Theodoros M.

AU - Reeves, Neil D.

AU - Baltzopoulos, Vasilios

AU - Maganaris, Constantinos N.

PY - 2006/12/1

Y1 - 2006/12/1

N2 - Activation capacity has traditionally been assessed using the interpolated twitch technique (ITT) and central activation ratio (CAR). However, the quantitative agreement of the two methods and the physiological mechanisms underpinning any possible differences have not been fully elucidated. The aim of this study was to compare and assess the sensitivity of the ITT and CAR to potential errors introduced by (1) evoking inadequate force, by manipulating the number of stimuli, and (2) neglecting differences in series elasticity between conditions, by manipulating joint angle. Ten subjects performed knee extension contractions at 30° and 90° knee-joint angles during which the ITT and CAR methods were applied using 1, 2, 4, and 8 electrical stimuli. Joint angle influenced the ITT outcome with higher values taken at 90° (P < 0.05), while the number of stimuli influenced the CAR outcome with a higher number of stimuli yielding lower values (P < 0.05). For any given joint angle and stimulus number, the CAR method produced higher activation values than the ITT method by 8%-16%. Therefore, in the quantification of voluntary drive with the ITT and CAR methods consideration should be given not only to the number of stimuli applied but also to the effect of series elasticity due to joint-angle differences, since these factors may differently affect the outcome of the calculation, depending on the approach followed.

AB - Activation capacity has traditionally been assessed using the interpolated twitch technique (ITT) and central activation ratio (CAR). However, the quantitative agreement of the two methods and the physiological mechanisms underpinning any possible differences have not been fully elucidated. The aim of this study was to compare and assess the sensitivity of the ITT and CAR to potential errors introduced by (1) evoking inadequate force, by manipulating the number of stimuli, and (2) neglecting differences in series elasticity between conditions, by manipulating joint angle. Ten subjects performed knee extension contractions at 30° and 90° knee-joint angles during which the ITT and CAR methods were applied using 1, 2, 4, and 8 electrical stimuli. Joint angle influenced the ITT outcome with higher values taken at 90° (P < 0.05), while the number of stimuli influenced the CAR outcome with a higher number of stimuli yielding lower values (P < 0.05). For any given joint angle and stimulus number, the CAR method produced higher activation values than the ITT method by 8%-16%. Therefore, in the quantification of voluntary drive with the ITT and CAR methods consideration should be given not only to the number of stimuli applied but also to the effect of series elasticity due to joint-angle differences, since these factors may differently affect the outcome of the calculation, depending on the approach followed.

KW - Central activation ratio

KW - Electrical stimulation

KW - Interpolated twitch technique

KW - Maximum voluntary contraction

KW - Series elastic component

U2 - 10.1002/mus.20610

DO - 10.1002/mus.20610

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 17013889

AN - SCOPUS:33845285526

VL - 34

SP - 740

EP - 746

JO - Muscle and Nerve

JF - Muscle and Nerve

SN - 0148-639X

IS - 6

ER -