Trial reportPhysiological reports2019
Concentric strength training at optimal or short muscle length improves strength equally but does not reduce fatigability of hamstring muscles.
Trial report in Physiological reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Concentric strength training at optimal or short muscle length improves strength equally but does not reduce fatigability of hamstring muscles.Physiological reports · 2019Trial
- Combined Endurance and Strength or Only Endurance Training? Effects of Training Mode on Neuromuscular Characteristics and Functional Abilities in Obese Adolescent Girls Enrolled in a Weight-Reduction Program.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2024Article
- Differential changes in muscle architecture and neuromuscular fatigability induced by isometric resistance training at short and long muscle-tendon unit lengths.Journal of applied physiology (Bethesda, Md. : 1985) · 2020Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of a 6-week period of knee flexion strength training at either optimal or short muscle length, on length-specific muscle strength and fatigue. Twelve healthy volunteers performed dynamic (isokinetic concentric) training with one leg at short and the contralateral leg at optimal muscle length for 6 weeks. Knee flexor muscle strength was assessed before and after training, comprising maximal voluntary isometric and dynamic contractions at short, intermediate and near optimal muscle length and electrically evoked, contractions at near optimal length only. Fatigability was tested by performing 60 maximal concentric contractions at either short or optimal muscle length. Isometric torque at all muscle lengths improved equally by training at short and optimal muscle length, for example, tested at short 18 (17) versus 21 (17) % (CI) and at optimal 14 (8) versus 17 (16) % muscle length, respectively. Likewise, equal improvements were observed for dynamic contractions in both groups. Prior to training, fatigue induced at optimal muscle length tended to be more pronounced than at short muscle length (fatigue-indexes -41 (6) vs. -34 (7) %, respectively, P = 0.05). However, training at either length did not reduce fatigability. Training with maximal concentric contractions at either short or optimal muscle length for 6 weeks improved isometric and dynamic muscle strength in the entire range of motion without inducing any discernible length-specific adaptations. However, strength training at restricted muscle length did not reduce relative fatigue when induced at either short or optimal muscle length.
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.