ArticleEuropean journal of applied physiology2025
Effects of ischemic pre-conditioning on electrically stimulated contractions.
Article in European journal of applied physiology, 2025. 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.
- Ischemic preconditioning: exploring local ergogenic mechanisms in non-fatiguing voluntary contractions.Frontiers in physiology · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeIschemic pre-conditioning (IPC) offers protection against future ischemic events and may improve sports performance due to several mechanisms at local and systemic levels. This study investigates the local effects on muscle contractility in electrically induced muscle contractions, thus effectively excluding any uncontrolled change in the motor drive.
methodsTwenty-one subjects were divided into two groups: 12 subjects in the IPC group (3 × 5/5 min right arm ischemia/reperfusion; cuff pressure 250 mmHg) and 9 subjects in the SHAM group (same treatment at 20 mmHg). The adductor pollicis was contracted by supramaximal stimulation of the ulnar nerve with single pulses, trains of stimuli (5, 8, 10 and 12 Hz, 1-s duration) and bursts (4 pulses, 25 Hz), all separated by 5-s intervals. The stimulation sequence was delivered before and 15 and 30 min after IPC/SHAM treatment. The isometric contraction force, the superficial electromyographic signal, and tissue oxygenation were continuously monitored.
resultsA significant force decrease in time was observed at 8, 10 (p < 0.01) and 12 Hz (p < 0.05) along with a decrease in half-relaxation time in single twitches and bursts (p = 0.01), regardless of treatment. This general time-related weakening was more marked in IPC than SHAM at 5-Hz stimulation. No effects were observed on the magnitude of the superficial electromyographic signal.
conclusionData indicate that IPC does not increase muscle force during electrically stimulated contractions, supporting the idea that IPC's ergogenic effects are not due to increased muscle contractility.
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.