Repeated measurements of Adaptive Force: Maximal holding capacity differs from other maximal strength parameters and preliminary characteristics for non-professional strength vs. endurance athletes
Open Access
- 22 February 2023
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Frontiers Media SA in Frontiers in Physiology
- Vol. 14, 1020954
Abstract
The Adaptive Force (AF) reflects the neuromuscular capacity to adapt to external loads during holding muscle actions and is similar to motions in real life and sports. The maximal isometric AF (AFisomax) was considered to be the most relevant parameter and was assumed to have major importance regarding injury mechanisms and the development of musculoskeletal pain. The aim of this study was to investigate the behavior of different torque parameters over the course of 30 repeated maximal AF trials. In addition, maximal holding vs. maximal pushing isometric muscle actions were compared. A side consideration was the behavior of torques in the course of repeated AF actions when comparing strength and endurance athletes. The elbow flexors of n = 12 males (six strength/six endurance athletes, non-professionals) were measured 30 times (120 s rest) using a pneumatic device. Maximal voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) was measured pre and post. MVIC, AFisomax, and AFmax (maximal torque of one AF measurement) were evaluated regarding different considerations and statistical tests. AFmax and AFisomax declined in the course of 30 trials [slope regression (mean ± standard deviation): AFmax = −0.323 ± 0.263; AFisomax = −0.45 ± 0.45]. The decline from start to end amounted to −12.8% ± 8.3% (p < 0.001) for AFmax and −25.41% ± 26.40% (p < 0.001) for AFisomax. AF parameters declined more in strength vs. endurance athletes. Thereby, strength athletes showed a rather stable decline for AFmax and a plateau formation for AFisomax after 15 trials. In contrast, endurance athletes reduced their AFmax, especially after the first five trials, and remained on a rather similar level for AFisomax. The maximum of AFisomax of all 30 trials amounted 67.67% ± 13.60% of MVIC (p < 0.001, n = 12), supporting the hypothesis of two types of isometric muscle action (holding vs. pushing). The findings provided the first data on the behavior of torque parameters after repeated isometric–eccentric actions and revealed further insights into neuromuscular control strategies. Additionally, they highlight the importance of investigating AF parameters in athletes based on the different behaviors compared to MVIC. This is assumed to be especially relevant regarding injury mechanisms.Keywords
This publication has 91 references indexed in Scilit:
- Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF): Its Mechanisms and Effects on Range of Motion and Muscular FunctionJournal of Human Kinetics, 2012
- A narrative review of manual muscle testing and implications for muscle testing researchJournal of Chiropractic Medicine, 2011
- Ipsilateral motor cortical responses to TMS during lengthening and shortening of the contralateral wrist flexorsEuropean Journal of Neuroscience, 2011
- Muscle activity and time to task failure differ with load compliance and target force for elbow flexor musclesJournal of Applied Physiology, 2011
- Skeletal muscle: Energy metabolism, fiber types, fatigue and adaptabilityExperimental Cell Research, 2010
- Differentiation of power and endurance athletes based on their muscle fatigability assessed by new spectral electromyographic indicesJournal of Sports Sciences, 2009
- Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation StretchingSports Medicine, 2006
- Skeletal Muscle Fiber Type: Influence on Contractile and Metabolic PropertiesPLOS Biology, 2004
- Measurement Tools Used in the Study of Eccentric Contraction???Induced InjurySports Medicine, 1999
- No Adjustments Are Needed for Multiple ComparisonsEpidemiology, 1990