Trial reportPhysiological reports2024
Influence of kilohertz frequency, burst duty cycle and burst duration on evoked torque, discomfort and muscle efficiency: A randomized crossover trial.
Trial report in Physiological reports, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Kilohertz-frequency alternating currents (KFACs) have been indicated to minimize muscle atrophy and weakness. However, the optimal stimulation parameters still need to be determined.
objectiveThis study aimed to investigate the effects of different KFACs on evoked torque, current efficiency, and perceived discomfort.
designKFACs with frequencies of 1 kHz (Aussie current) and 2.5 kHz (Russian current), along with two duty cycles (10% and 20%), were randomly applied to the triceps surae muscle of healthy participants using a crossover design. The NMES intensity, NMES-evoked torque, NMES efficiency, and NMES discomfort were measured in maximal and submaximal conditions. Statistical analyses were conducted using a two-way mixed-model ANOVA with repeated measures. Forty-four participants were included.
resultsAussie currents produced higher evoked torque and efficiency in maximal and submaximal efforts, with higher perceived discomfort in maximal effort. Although the Australian current may cause greater discomfort at maximal efforts, it matches the Russian current in perceived discomfort at submaximal levels. The 20% duty cycle produced the highest efficiency in submaximal efforts.
conclusionIn both maximal and submaximal efforts, the Aussie current demonstrated superior NMES efficiency, yielding higher torque with lower amplitude than the Russian current. Clinicians should take these findings into consideration when prescribing KFACs to optimize clinical outcomes.
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.