FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2012242073> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2012242073 endingPage "S262" @default.
• W2012242073 startingPage "S262" @default.
• W2012242073 abstract "Within the last years portable electric muscle stimulation (EMS) devices are offered on a commercial basis. They are advertised as simulating the muscular activation pattern of plyometric training programmes and, thus, improving the development of strength in stretch-shortening cycles, e. g. drop jumps. However, so far there is no experimental evidence for this claim. PURPOSE: Therefore, it was investigated if 4 weeks of EMS (Compex Medical Care®) of leg extensors (m. rectus femoris, m. gastrocnemius, m. soleus) might improve reactive strength during drop jumps. METHODS 34 healthy subjects (25 males, 9 females; age 19–27 yrs) took part in the study. They had no history of earlier resistance training of the lower limbs. After initial testing and stratification for jumping performance, subjects were randomly assigned to conventional drop jump training (DJ, n = 13; 6 series of 8 maximal drop jumps, dropping height: 28 cm during week 1 and progressively increased to 38 cm until week 4), EMS (n = 13; stimulation schedule analogous to DJ; maximal stimulation frequency: 150 Hz; amperage self-regulated to tolerated maximum), or to control conditions without change in physical activity (CO, n = 8). Supervised training was conducted twice per week, i. e. for a total of 8 sessions. Vertical jumping height (JH) and ground contact time (GCT) during drop jumps were measured before and after the intervention. The ratio JH/GCT was computed as a reactivity index (RI) and served as primary dependent variable. To control for transfer effects, after post-testing EMS and CO conducted an additional 2 week conventional drop jump training. RESULTS The largest increase in RI was recorded in DJ (11.3 ± 8.9%, p<0.001 compared with CO and EMS). The RI change in EMS was small (1.2 ± 2.6%) and did not differ significantly from CO (−1.3 ± 2.6%). Drop jump performance did not differ between EMS and CO after the transfer phase (6.4 ± 5.1% and 6.8 ± 2.7%, respectively; p = 0.85). CONCLUSIONS It can be concluded that 4 weeks leg extensor EMS do not lead to improvements in drop jump performance. Conventional drop jump training represents a more efficient training mode. Also, EMS does not facilitate larger training effects of the conventional training. Within a healthy young population, therefore, EMS cannot be recommended for the purpose of increasing reactive strength of the lower limbs." @default.
• W2012242073 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2012242073 creator A5039978690 @default.
• W2012242073 creator A5071646862 @default.
• W2012242073 date "2005-05-01" @default.
• W2012242073 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
• W2012242073 title "Electrical Muscle Stimulation Of Leg Extensors Does Not Enhance Drop Jump Performance" @default.
• W2012242073 doi "https://doi.org/10.1097/00005768-200505001-01340" @default.
• W2012242073 hasPublicationYear "2005" @default.
• W2012242073 type Work @default.
• W2012242073 sameAs 2012242073 @default.
• W2012242073 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2012242073 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2012242073 hasAuthorship W2012242073A5039978690 @default.
• W2012242073 hasAuthorship W2012242073A5071646862 @default.
• W2012242073 hasConcept C121332964 @default.
• W2012242073 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2012242073 hasConcept C1862650 @default.
• W2012242073 hasConcept C24998067 @default.
• W2012242073 hasConcept C2776312033 @default.
• W2012242073 hasConcept C2777766275 @default.
• W2012242073 hasConcept C2779897013 @default.
• W2012242073 hasConcept C2780695682 @default.
• W2012242073 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
• W2012242073 hasConcept C42407357 @default.
• W2012242073 hasConcept C62520636 @default.
• W2012242073 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2012242073 hasConcept C99508421 @default.
• W2012242073 hasConceptScore W2012242073C121332964 @default.
• W2012242073 hasConceptScore W2012242073C126322002 @default.
• W2012242073 hasConceptScore W2012242073C1862650 @default.
• W2012242073 hasConceptScore W2012242073C24998067 @default.
• W2012242073 hasConceptScore W2012242073C2776312033 @default.
• W2012242073 hasConceptScore W2012242073C2777766275 @default.
• W2012242073 hasConceptScore W2012242073C2779897013 @default.
• W2012242073 hasConceptScore W2012242073C2780695682 @default.
• W2012242073 hasConceptScore W2012242073C33923547 @default.
• W2012242073 hasConceptScore W2012242073C42407357 @default.
• W2012242073 hasConceptScore W2012242073C62520636 @default.
• W2012242073 hasConceptScore W2012242073C71924100 @default.
• W2012242073 hasConceptScore W2012242073C99508421 @default.
• W2012242073 hasIssue "Supplement" @default.
• W2012242073 hasLocation W20122420731 @default.
• W2012242073 hasOpenAccess W2012242073 @default.
• W2012242073 hasPrimaryLocation W20122420731 @default.
• W2012242073 hasRelatedWork W1553524718 @default.
• W2012242073 hasRelatedWork W2022658652 @default.
• W2012242073 hasRelatedWork W2089251219 @default.
• W2012242073 hasRelatedWork W2215576999 @default.
• W2012242073 hasRelatedWork W2244124830 @default.
• W2012242073 hasRelatedWork W2334192603 @default.
• W2012242073 hasRelatedWork W2413947414 @default.
• W2012242073 hasRelatedWork W4200326319 @default.
• W2012242073 hasRelatedWork W4296569687 @default.
• W2012242073 hasRelatedWork W3139892632 @default.
• W2012242073 hasVolume "37" @default.
• W2012242073 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2012242073 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2012242073 magId "2012242073" @default.
• W2012242073 workType "article" @default.