Is the joint-angle specificity of isometric resistance training real? And if so, does it have a neural basis?
Clicks: 374
ID: 44875
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
64.0
/100
374 views
267 readers
Trending
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #3 of 16 articles by views in European journal of applied physiology
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
There are suggestions that isometric resistance training (RT) produces highly angle-specific changes in strength with the greatest changes at the training angle, but these effects remain controversial with limited rigorous evidence, and the possible underpinning physiological mechanism(s) remain opaque. This study investigated the extent of angle-specific changes in strength and neuromuscular activation after RT in comparison to a control group.A RT group (n = 13) performed 14 isometric RT sessions at a knee-joint angle of 65° (0° is anatomical position) over a 4-week period, whilst a control group (CON, n = 9) maintained their habitual activity. Pre- and post-test sessions involved voluntary and evoked isometric knee extension contractions at five knee-joint angles (35°, 50°, 65°, 80° and 95°), while electromyography was recorded.RT group increased maximum voluntary torque (MVT) at the training angle (65°; + 12%) as well as 80° (+ 7%), 50° (+ 11%) and 35° (+ 5%). Joint-angle specificity was demonstrated within the RT group (MVT increased more at some angles vs. others), and also by more rigorous between-group comparisons (i.e., larger improvements after RT vs. CON at some angles than others). For the RT group, normalized EMG increased at three of the same joint angles as strength, but not for CON. Importantly, however, neither within- or between-group analyses provided evidence of joint angle-specific changes in activation.In conclusion, this study provides robust evidence for joint angle-specific strength gains after isometric RT, with weaker evidence that changes in neuromuscular activation may contribute to these adaptations.
| Reference Key |
lanza2019iseuropean
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Lanza, Marcel B;Balshaw, Thomas G;Folland, Jonathan P; |
| Journal | European journal of applied physiology |
| Year | 2019 |
| DOI |
10.1007/s00421-019-04229-z
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.