Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31624949›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of applied physiology2019

Effectiveness of combining microcurrent with resistance training in trained males.

Fernando Naclerio, Marcos Seijo, Bettina Karsten, George Brooker, Leandro Carbone, Jack Thirkell, Eneko Larumbe-Zabala

Erratum issued Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of applied physiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT05567237 (Effects of Microcurrent Treatment With and Without Resistance Exercises on Body Composition, Muscle Strength, and Physical Function in Middle-aged Adults), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT05567237 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Effects of Microcurrent Treatment With and Without Resistance Exercises on Body Composition, Muscle Strength, and Physical Function in Middle-aged Adults

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of GreenwichRan2022 to 2024Enrolled40ConditionsSarcopenia, Ageing WellArmsMicrocurrent treatment with resistance exercise programme, Resistance exercise programme, Microcurrent treatment, No treatment
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Effects of Acute Microcurrent Electrical Stimulation on Muscle Function and Subsequent Recovery Strategy.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Fernando NaclerioDepartment of Life and Sport Science, University of Greenwich, Avery Hill Campus, Sparrows Farm, Avery Hill Road, Eltham, SE9 2BT, UK. f.j.naclerio@gre.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-7405-4894
Marcos SeijoDepartment of Life and Sport Science, University of Greenwich, Avery Hill Campus, Sparrows Farm, Avery Hill Road, Eltham, SE9 2BT, UK.
Bettina KarstenDepartment of Exercise and Sport Science, Lunex International University of Health, Exercise and Sports, Differdange, Luxemburg.
George BrookerDepartment of Life and Sport Science, University of Greenwich, Avery Hill Campus, Sparrows Farm, Avery Hill Road, Eltham, SE9 2BT, UK.
Leandro CarboneDepartment of Life and Sport Science, University of Greenwich, Avery Hill Campus, Sparrows Farm, Avery Hill Road, Eltham, SE9 2BT, UK.
Jack ThirkellDepartment of Biological Sciences, Royal Holloway, University of London, London, UK.
Eneko Larumbe-ZabalaClinical Research Institute, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Lubbock, TX, USA.

Funding

ARC Microtech Ltd G2807
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionMicrocurrent has been used to promote tissue healing after injury or to hasten muscle remodeling post exercise. PURPOSE: To compare the effects of resistance training in combination with either, microcurrent or sham treatment, on-body composition and muscular architecture. Additionally, changes in performance and perceived delayed onset muscle soreness (DOMS) were determined.

methodsEighteen males (25.7 ± 7.6 years) completed an 8-week resistance training program involving 3 workouts per week (24 total sessions) wearing a microcurrent (MIC, n = 9) or a sham (SH, n = 9) device for 3-h post-workout or in the morning during non-training days. Measurements were conducted at pre and post intervention.

resultsCompared to baseline, both groups increased (p < 0.05) muscle thickness of the elbow flexors (MIC + 2.9 ± 1.4 mm; SH + 3.0 ± 2.4 mm), triceps brachialis (MIC + 4.3 ± 2.8 mm; SH + 2.7 ± 2.6 mm), vastus medialis (MIC + 1.5 ± 1.5 mm; SH + 0.9 ± 0.8 mm) and vastus lateralis (MIC + 6.8 ± 8.0 mm; SH + 3.2 ± 1.8 mm). Although both groups increased (p < 0.01) the pennation angle of vastus lateralis (MIC + 2.90° ± 0.95°; SH + 1.90° ± 1.35°, p < 0.01), the change measured in MIC was higher (p = 0.045) than that observed in SH. Furthermore, only MIC enlarged (p < 0.01) the pennation angle of brachialis (MIC + 1.93 ± 1.51). Both groups improved (p < 0.05) bench press strength and power but only MIC enhanced (p < 0.01) vertical jump height. At post intervention, only MIC decreased (p < 0.05) DOMS at 12-h, 24-h, and 48-h after performing an exercise-induced muscle soreness protocol.

conclusionA 3-h daily use of microcurrent maximized muscular architectural changes and attenuated DOMS with no added significant benefits on body composition and performance.

Indexed as

DOMSHypertrophyMuscle thicknessNon-invasive electrical microampere stimulusStrength

Identifiers

PMID31624949
PMCPMC6858393

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.