Trial reportPloS one2024
Effect of Russian current expert modes on quadriceps muscle torque in healthy adults: A single-blinded randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of Russian current therapy targeting the anterior tibial group on balance and fall risk in post-stroke patients: a randomised controlled trial.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRussian current (RC), a well-known neuromuscular electrical stimulation operating at 2500 Hz, has demonstrated significant strength improvement over traditional exercises due to its high tolerance and low pain provocation. Despite extensive NMES parameter research, the specific effects of expert modes, particularly ON2 and Rest, remain unexplored. This study investigates the direct effect of these expert modes on quadriceps muscle strength in healthy adults.
methodsThis is a single-blind, randomization-controlled trial. Forty-eight healthy university students (31 females, 17 males) were assigned in two randomized experimental groups either the ON2 or Rest mode for a 15-minute electrical stimulation session. Quadriceps maximum voluntary isokinetic contraction measurements were taken before and directly after RC application using Biodex Medical Systems 4 pro isokinetic dynamometer.
resultsBoth RC modes significantly increased the quadriceps muscle torque in healthy adults compared to baseline (p<0.05). Baseline mean torque was 123.28 (SD = 38.8), and post- RC mean torque was 136.67 (SD = 45.76). Deviation from normality was observed at baseline (p = 0.034) and persisted post-RC application (p = 0.017). The Wilcoxon test reported significant increases in quadriceps muscle knee torque for both ON2 and Rest groups (p < 0.001). The lack of ties in ranks and negative Z-values highlight the robustness of the observed effects.
conclusionThe findings of this study align with previous research on NMES and RC supporting the idea that electrical stimulation enhances muscle strength, selecting the appropriate RC expert modes can assist physiotherapist in tailoring rehabilitation program to achieve their specific strength goals.
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.