Trial reportJournal of sports science & medicine2020
Effects of an Impulse Frequency Dependent 10-Week Whole-body Electromyostimulation Training Program on Specific Sport Performance Parameters.
Trial report in Journal of sports science & medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing the Impact of Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation-Based Fingerboard Training versus Conventional Fingerboard Training on Finger Flexor Endurance in Intermediate to Advanced Sports Climbers: A Randomized Controlled Study.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Trial
- Article
- No beneficial effect of aerobic whole-body electromyostimulation on lower limbs strength and power - a randomized controlled trial.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2024Article
- Non-Athletic Cohorts Enrolled in Longitudinal Whole-Body Electromyostimulation Trials-An Evidence Map.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- The Effect of Whole-Body Electromyostimulation Program on Physical Performance and Selected Cardiometabolic Markers in Obese Young Females.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Article
- Article
- Additional Active Movements Are Not Required for Strength Gains in the Untrained during Short-Term Whole-Body Electromyostimulation Training.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- NMES superimposed on movement is equally effective as heavy slow resistance training in patellar tendinopathy.Journal of musculoskeletal & neuronal interactions · 2022Article
- Profile of Whole Body Electromyostimulation Training Users-A Pilot Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Can A Superimposed Whole-Body Electromyostimulation Intervention Enhance the Effects of a 10-Week Athletic Strength Training in Youth Elite Soccer Players?Journal of sports science & medicine · 2020Article
- Whole-body electromyostimulation in physical therapy: do gender, skinfold thickness or body composition influence maximum intensity tolerance?Journal of physical therapy science · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The difference in the efficacy of altered stimulation parameters in whole-body-electromyostimulation (WB-EMS) training remains largely unexplored. However, higher impulse frequencies (>50 Hz) might be most adequate for strength gain. The aim of this study was to analyze potential differences in sports-related performance parameters after a 10-week WB-EMS training with different frequencies. A total of 51 untrained participants (24.9 ± 3.9 years, 174 ± 9 cm, 72.4 ± 16.4 kg, BMI 23.8 ± 4.1, body fat 24.7 ± 8.1 %) was randomly divided into three groups: one inactive control group (CON) and two training groups. They completed a 10-week WB-EMS program of 1.5 sessions/week, equal content but different stimulation frequencies (training with 20 Hz (T20) vs. training with 85 Hz (T85)). Before and after intervention, all participants completed jumping (Counter Movement Jump (CMJ), Squat Jump (SJ), Drop Jump (DJ)), sprinting (5m, 10m, 30m), and strength tests (isometric trunk flexion/extension). One-way ANOVA was applied to calculate parameter changes. Post-hoc least significant difference tests were performed to identify group differences. Significant differences were identified for CMJ (p = 0.007), SJ (p = 0.022), trunk flexion (p = 0.020) and extension (p=.013) with significant group differences between both training groups and CON (not between the two training groups T20 and T85). A 10-week WB-EMS training leads to significant improvements of jump and strength parameters in untrained participants. No differences could be detected between the frequencies. Therefore, both stimulation frequencies can be regarded as adequate for increasing specific sport performance parameters. Further aspects as regeneration or long term effects by the use of different frequencies still need to be clarified.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32390720PMC7196755W3010379766What 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.