Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34168697›Full record

ArticleJournal of human kinetics2021

Cardiorespiratory, Metabolic and Perceived Responses to Electrical Stimulation of Upper-Body Muscles While Performing Arm Cycling.

Christoph Zinner, Manuel Matzka, Sebastian Krumscheid, Hans-Christer Holmberg, Billy Sperlich

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of human kinetics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Christoph ZinnerDepartment of Sport, University of Applied Sciences for Police and Administration of Hesse, Wiesbaden, Germany.
Manuel MatzkaIntegrative and Experimental Exercise Science and Training, University of Würzburg, Würzburg Germany.
Sebastian KrumscheidDepartment of Mathematics RWTH Aachen University, Aachen Germany.
Hans-Christer HolmbergDepartment of Health Sciences, Mid Sweden University, Östersund, Sweden.
Billy SperlichIntegrative and Experimental Exercise Science and Training, University of Würzburg, Würzburg Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study was designed to assess systemic cardio-respiratory, metabolic and perceived responses to incremental arm cycling with concurrent electrical myostimulation (EMS). Eleven participants (24 ± 3 yrs; 182 ± 10 cm; 86 ± 16.8 kg) performed two incremental tests involving arm cycling until volitional exhaustion was reached with and without EMS of upper-body muscles. The peak power output was 10.1% lower during arm cycling with (128 ± 30 W) than without EMS (141 ± 25 W, p = 0.01; d = 0.47). In addition, the heart rate (2-9%), oxygen uptake (7-15%), blood lactate concentration (8-46%) and ratings of perceived exertion (4-14%) while performing submaximal arm cycling with EMS were all higher with than without EMS (all p < 0.05). Upon exhaustion, the heart rate, oxygen uptake, lactate concentration, and ratings of perceived exertion did not differ between the two conditions (all p > 0.05). In conclusion, arm cycling with EMS induced more pronounced cardio-respiratory, metabolic and perceived responses, especially during submaximal arm cycling. This form of exercise with stimulation might be beneficial for a variety of athletes competing in sports involving considerable generation of work by the upper body (e.g., kayaking, cross-country skiing, swimming, rowing and various parasports).

Indexed as

arm cyclingoxygen uptakeparasportsratings of perceived exertionupper body

Identifiers

PMID34168697
PMCPMC8008305

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.