Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Muscle Nerve. 2018 Jan;57(1):E70-E77. doi: 10.1002/mus.25747. Epub 2017 Aug 9.

Test-retest reliability of wide-pulse high-frequency neuromuscular electrical stimulation evoked force.

Author information

1
Institute of Sport Sciences, Faculty of Biology and Medicine, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
2
EA4660-C3S Laboratory, Culture, Sport, Health and Society, University of Bourgogne Franche-Comté, Besançon, France.
3
Institut NeuroMyoGène, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, INSERM U1217, CNRS UMR 5310, Villeurbanne, France.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION:

We compare forces evoked by wide-pulse high-frequency (WPHF) neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) delivered to a nerve trunk versus muscle belly and assess their test-retest intraindividual and interindividual reliability.

METHODS:

Forces evoked during 2 sessions with WPHF NMES delivered over the tibial nerve trunk and 2 sessions over the triceps surae muscle belly were compared. Ten individuals participated in 4 sessions involving ten 20-s WPHF NMES contractions interspaced by 40-s recovery. Mean evoked force and force time integral of each contraction were quantified.

RESULTS:

For both nerve trunk and muscle belly stimulation, intraindividual test-retest reliability was good (intraclass correlation coefficient > 0.9), and interindividual variability was large (coefficient of variation between 140% and 180%). Nerve trunk and muscle belly stimulation resulted in similar evoked forces.

DISCUSSION:

WPHF NMES locations might be chosen by individual preference because intraindividual reliability was relatively good for both locations. Muscle Nerve 57: E70-E77, 2018.

KEYWORDS:

evoked force reliability; extra force; interindividual variability; intraindividual variability; sustained activity

PMID:
28722822
DOI:
10.1002/mus.25747
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Wiley
Loading ...
Support Center