Trial reportEuropean journal of applied physiology2017
The importance of cutaneous feedback on neural activation during maximal voluntary contraction.
Trial report in European journal of applied physiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study was to investigate the importance of cutaneous feedback on neural activation during maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) of the ankle plantar flexors.
methodsThe effects of cutaneous plantar anaesthesia were assessed in 15 subjects and compared to 15 controls, using a one-day pre/post-repeated measures design. Cutaneous plantar anaesthesia was induced by lidocaine injection at the centre of forefoot, lateral midfoot, and heel. Each subject performed isometric MVCs of the ankle plantar flexors. During each isometric ramp contraction, the following variables were assessed: maximal isometric torque; surface electromyography (EMG) activity of the medial gastrocnemius (MG) and tibialis anterior (TA) muscles; and co-contraction index (CCI) between the MG and TA.
resultsFor ankle torque, two-way ANOVA showed no significant interaction between the pre/post-measurements × group (p = 0.166). However, MG activity presented significant interactions between the pre/post-measurements × group (p = 0.014). Post hoc comparisons indicated a decrease of MG activity in the experimental group, from 85.9 ± 11.9 to 62.7 ± 30.8% (p = 0.016). Additionally, the post-anaesthesia MG activity of the experimental group differed statistically with pre- and post-MG activity of the control group (p = 0.027 and p = 0.008, respectively). For TA activity and CCI, two-way ANOVA detected no significant interactions between the pre/post-measurements × group (p = 0.605 and p = 0.332, respectively).
conclusionOur results indicate that during MVC, cutaneous feedback modulates neural activity to MG muscle, without changing the extent of MG-TA co-contraction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.