Bilateral Effect of Unilateral Isokinetic Concentric Training and Russian Current Stimulation on Quadriceps Strength

Amira Hussin Draz; Amr Almaz Abdel-aziem; Mohamed Hisham Abo Elenain

doi:doi:10.11648/j.ajhr.20140206.15

| Peer-Reviewed

Bilateral Effect of Unilateral Isokinetic Concentric Training and Russian Current Stimulation on Quadriceps Strength

Amira Hussin Draz, Amr Almaz Abdel-aziem, Mohamed Hisham Abo Elenain

Published in American Journal of Health Research (Volume 2, Issue 6)

Received: 13 August 2014 Accepted: 25 August 2014 Published: 30 October 2014

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

Isokinetic training and Russian current stimulation have been advertised to increase muscle strength. So, the purpose of this study was to compare between unilateral isokinetic concentric training and Russian current stimulation on the quadriceps strength of ipsilateral and contralateral limbs. Sixty healthy male subjects were randomly assigned into 3 equal groups; Isokinetic group; received isokinetic concentric training. Russian group; received Russian current stimulation, and control group: did not receive any training program. Isokinetic and Russian groups trained for 4 weeks, 3 session/week on the dominant quadriceps femoris muscle. Biodex Multi-joint System 3, Biodex, Shirley, NY, used to measure the isokinetic concentric peak torque/body weight before and after 4 weeks training for all groups at angular velocity 30°/s. For contralateral and ipsilateral quadriceps strength there was significant increase in the quadriceps strength of isokinetic and Russain group (p= 0.000). However, there was no significant increase in the quadriceps strength of control group (p= 0.214, 0.061) respectively. There was no significant difference between isokinetic and Russian group for the value of increasing of the quadriceps strength (p= 0.391, 0.579) respectively. The percent of improvement of ipsilateral side was significantly higher than the improvement of contralateral side for isokinetic and Russian group (p= 0.004, 0.006) respectively. So, Isokinetic training and Russian current stimulation have equal level of effectiveness in improving the concentric strength of the contralateral and ipsilateral quadriceps muscle. In spite of, the improvement of ipsilateral side was higher than that of the contralateral side.

Published in	American Journal of Health Research (Volume 2, Issue 6)
DOI	10.11648/j.ajhr.20140206.15
Page(s)	350-355
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2014. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Quadriceps Strength, Isokinetic Training, Russian Current

References

[1]	Enoka RM. Muscle strength and its development-new perspectives. Sports Med 1988; 6: 146-168.
[2]	Munn J, Herbert RD, Gandevia SC. Contralateral effects of unilateral resistance training: a meta-analysis. J Appl Physiol 2004; 96:1861-1866.
[3]	Zhou S. Chronic neural adaptations to unilateral exercise: mechanisms of cross education. Exerc Sport Sci Rev 2000; 28:177-184.
[4]	Folland JP, Williams AG. The adaptations to strength training: morphological and neurological contributions to increased strength. Sports Med 2007; 37:145-168.
[5]	Jones DA, Rutherford OM. Human muscle strength training: the effects of three different regimes and the nature of the resultant changes. J Physiol 1987; 391:1-11.
[6]	Komi PV. Training of muscle strength and power: interaction of neuromotoric, hypertrophic and mechanical factors. Int J Sports Med 1986; 7(suppl):10-16.
[7]	MacDougall JD, Gibala MJ, Tarnapolsky MA, MacDonald JR, Interisano SA, Yarasheski KE. The time course for elevated muscle protein synthesis following heavy resistance exercise. Can J Appl Physiol 1995; 20:480-486.
[8]	Adamson M, MacQuaide N, Helgerud J, Hoff J, Kemi OJ. Unilateral arm strength training improves contralateral peak force and rate of force development. Eur J Appl Physiol 2008; 750-756.
[9]	Behm DG. Neuromuscular implications and applications of resistance training. J Strength Cond Res 1995; 4:264-274.
[10]	Cannon RJ, Cafarelli E. Neuromuscular adaptations to training. J Appl Physiol 1987; 63: 2396-2402.
[11]	Duchateau J, Semmler JG, Enoka RM. Training adaptations in the behavior of human motor units. J Appl Physiol 2006; 101:1766-1775.
[12]	Enoka RM. Neural adaptations with chronic physical activity. J Biomech 1997; 264:676-696.
[13]	Griffin L, Cafarelli E. Resistance training: cortical, spinal, and motor unit adaptations. Can J Appl Physiol 2005; 30:328-340.
[14]	Rich C, Cafarelli E. Submaximal motor unit firing rates after 8 week of isometric resistance training. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2000; 32:190-196.
[15]	Semmler JG. Motor unit synchronization and neuromuscular performance. Exerc Sports Sci Rev 2002; 30:8-14.
[16]	Van Cutsem M, Duchateau J, Hainaut K. Changes in single motor unit behaviour contribute to the increase in contraction speed after dynamic training in humans. J Physiol 1998; 513:295-305.
[17]	Carroll TJ, Herbert RD, Munn J, Lee M, Gandevia S. Contralateral effects of unilateral strength training: evidence and possible mechanisms. J Appl Physiol 2006; 101:1514-1522.
[18]	Lee M, Carroll TJ. Cross education: possible mechanisms for the contralateral effects of unilateral resistance training. Sports Med 2007; 37:1-14.
[19]	Croisier JL, Malnati M, Reichard LB, Peretz C, Dvir Z. Quadriceps and hamstring isokinetic strength and electromyographic activity measured at different ranges of motion: a reproducibility study. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 2007; 17(4):484-92.
[20]	Miller LE, Pierson LM, Nickols-Richardson SM, Wootten DF, Selmon SE, Ramp, WK Herbert WG. Knee extensor and flexor torque development with concentric and eccentric isokinetic training. Res Q Exerc Sport 2006; 77(1):58-63.
[21]	Eyigor S, Hepguler S, Capaci K. A comparison of muscle training methods in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Clin Rheumatol 2004; 23(2):109-115.
[22]	Lieber RL, Kelly MJ. Factors influencing quadriceps femoris muscle torque using transcutaneous neuromuscular electrical stimulation. Phys Ther 1991; 71(10):715-721.
[23]	Ward AR, Shkuratova N. Russian electrical stimulation: the early experiments. Phys Ther 2002; 82(10):1019-1030.
[24]	Gregory CM, Bickel CS. Recruitment patterns in human skeletal muscle during electrical stimulation. Phys Ther 2005; 85(4):358-364.
[25]	Currier DP, Mann R. Muscular strength development by electrical stimulation in healthy individuals. Phys Ther 1983; 63(6):915-921.
[26]	Requena Sánchez B, Padial Puche P, González-Badillo JJ. Percutaneous electrical stimulation in strength training: an update. J Strength Cond Res 2005; 19(2):438-448.
[27]	Laughman RK, Youdas JW, Garrett TR, Chao EY. Strength changes in the normal quadriceps femoris muscle as a result of electrical stimulation. Phys Ther 1983; 63(4):494-499.
[28]	Selkowitz DM. Improvement in isometric strength of the quadriceps femoris muscle after training with electrical stimulation. Phys Ther 1985; 65(2):186-196.
[29]	Soo CL, Currier DP, Threlkeld AJ. Augmenting voluntary torque of healthy muscle by optimization of electrical stimulation. Phys Ther 1988; 68(3):333-337.
[30]	Avila MA, Brasilerio JS, Salvini TF. Electrical stimulation and isokinetic training: effects on strength and neuromuscular properties of healthy young adults. Rev Bras Fisioter 2008; 12(6):435-440.
[31]	Maffiuletti NA, Zory R, Miotti D, Pellegrino MA, Jubeau M, Bottinelli R. Neuromuscular adaptations to electrostimulation resistance training. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2006; 85:167-175.
[32]	Vaz MA, Aragão FA, Boschi ÉS, Fortuna R, Melo Mde O. Effects of Russian current and low-frequency pulsed current on discomfort level and current amplitude at 10% maximal knee extensor torque. Physiother theory pract 2012; 28:617-623.
[33]	Porcari JP, McLean KP, Foster C, Kernozek T, Crenshaw B, Swenson C. Effects of electrical muscle stimulation on body composition, muscle strength, and physical appearance. J Strength Cond Res 2002; 16:165-172.
[34]	Evetovich TK, Housh TJ, Housh DJ, Johnson GO, Smith DB, Ebersole KT. The effect of concentric isokinetic strength training of the quadriceps femoris on electromyography and muscle strength in the trained and untrained limb. J Strength Cond Res 2001; 15(4):439-445.
[35]	Muellbacher W, Facchini S, Boroojerdi B, Hallett M. Changes in motor cortex excitability during ipsilateral hand muscle activation in humans. Clin Neurophysiol 2000; 111(2): 344–349.
[36]	Housh DJ, Housh TJ, Johnson GO, Chu WK. Hypertrophic response to unilateral concentric isokinetic resistance training. J Appl Physiol 1992; 73(1): 65-70.
[37]	Hortobagyi T, Scott K, Lambert J, Hamilton G, Tracy J. Cross-education of muscle strength is greater with stimulated than voluntary contractions. Motor Control 1999; 3(2): 205-219.
[38]	Zhou S, Oakman A, Davie AJ. Effects of unilateral voluntary and electromyostimulation training on muscular strength on the contralateral limb. Hong Kong J Sports Med Sports Sci 2002; XIV, 1-11.
[39]	Pearce AJ, Hendy A, Bowen WA, Kidgell DJ. Corticospinal adaptations and strength maintenance in the immobilized arm following 3 weeks unilateral strength training. Scand J Med Sci Sports 2013; 23(6):740-748.
[40]	Hendy AM, Spittle M, Kidgell DJ. Cross education and immobilisation: mechanisms and implications for injury rehabilitation. J Sci Med Sport 2012; 15(2): 94-101.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Amira Hussin Draz, Amr Almaz Abdel-aziem, Mohamed Hisham Abo Elenain. (2014). Bilateral Effect of Unilateral Isokinetic Concentric Training and Russian Current Stimulation on Quadriceps Strength. American Journal of Health Research, 2(6), 350-355. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajhr.20140206.15

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Amira Hussin Draz; Amr Almaz Abdel-aziem; Mohamed Hisham Abo Elenain. Bilateral Effect of Unilateral Isokinetic Concentric Training and Russian Current Stimulation on Quadriceps Strength. Am. J. Health Res. 2014, 2(6), 350-355. doi: 10.11648/j.ajhr.20140206.15

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Amira Hussin Draz, Amr Almaz Abdel-aziem, Mohamed Hisham Abo Elenain. Bilateral Effect of Unilateral Isokinetic Concentric Training and Russian Current Stimulation on Quadriceps Strength. Am J Health Res. 2014;2(6):350-355. doi: 10.11648/j.ajhr.20140206.15

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ajhr.20140206.15,
  author = {Amira Hussin Draz and Amr Almaz Abdel-aziem and Mohamed Hisham Abo Elenain},
  title = {Bilateral Effect of Unilateral Isokinetic Concentric Training and Russian Current Stimulation on Quadriceps Strength},
  journal = {American Journal of Health Research},
  volume = {2},
  number = {6},
  pages = {350-355},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ajhr.20140206.15},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajhr.20140206.15},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ajhr.20140206.15},
  abstract = {Isokinetic training and Russian current stimulation have been advertised to increase muscle strength. So, the purpose of this study was to compare between unilateral isokinetic concentric training and Russian current stimulation on the quadriceps strength of ipsilateral and contralateral limbs. Sixty healthy male subjects were randomly assigned into 3 equal groups; Isokinetic group; received isokinetic concentric training. Russian group; received Russian current stimulation, and control group: did not receive any training program. Isokinetic and Russian groups trained for 4 weeks, 3 session/week on the dominant quadriceps femoris muscle. Biodex Multi-joint System 3, Biodex, Shirley, NY, used to measure the isokinetic concentric peak torque/body weight before and after 4 weeks training for all groups at angular velocity 30°/s. For contralateral and ipsilateral quadriceps strength there was significant increase in the quadriceps strength of isokinetic and Russain group (p= 0.000). However, there was no significant increase in the quadriceps strength of control group (p= 0.214, 0.061) respectively. There was no significant difference between isokinetic and Russian group for the value of increasing of the quadriceps strength (p= 0.391, 0.579) respectively. The percent of improvement of ipsilateral side was significantly higher than the improvement of contralateral side for isokinetic and Russian group (p= 0.004, 0.006) respectively. So, Isokinetic training and Russian current stimulation have equal level of effectiveness in improving the concentric strength of the contralateral and ipsilateral quadriceps muscle. In spite of, the improvement of ipsilateral side was higher than that of the contralateral side.},
 year = {2014}
}

Copy | Download

TY - JOUR
T1 - Bilateral Effect of Unilateral Isokinetic Concentric Training and Russian Current Stimulation on Quadriceps Strength
AU - Amira Hussin Draz
AU - Amr Almaz Abdel-aziem
AU - Mohamed Hisham Abo Elenain
Y1 - 2014/10/30
PY - 2014
N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajhr.20140206.15
DO - 10.11648/j.ajhr.20140206.15
T2 - American Journal of Health Research
JF - American Journal of Health Research
JO - American Journal of Health Research
SP - 350
EP - 355
PB - Science Publishing Group
SN - 2330-8796
UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajhr.20140206.15
AB - Isokinetic training and Russian current stimulation have been advertised to increase muscle strength. So, the purpose of this study was to compare between unilateral isokinetic concentric training and Russian current stimulation on the quadriceps strength of ipsilateral and contralateral limbs. Sixty healthy male subjects were randomly assigned into 3 equal groups; Isokinetic group; received isokinetic concentric training. Russian group; received Russian current stimulation, and control group: did not receive any training program. Isokinetic and Russian groups trained for 4 weeks, 3 session/week on the dominant quadriceps femoris muscle. Biodex Multi-joint System 3, Biodex, Shirley, NY, used to measure the isokinetic concentric peak torque/body weight before and after 4 weeks training for all groups at angular velocity 30°/s. For contralateral and ipsilateral quadriceps strength there was significant increase in the quadriceps strength of isokinetic and Russain group (p= 0.000). However, there was no significant increase in the quadriceps strength of control group (p= 0.214, 0.061) respectively. There was no significant difference between isokinetic and Russian group for the value of increasing of the quadriceps strength (p= 0.391, 0.579) respectively. The percent of improvement of ipsilateral side was significantly higher than the improvement of contralateral side for isokinetic and Russian group (p= 0.004, 0.006) respectively. So, Isokinetic training and Russian current stimulation have equal level of effectiveness in improving the concentric strength of the contralateral and ipsilateral quadriceps muscle. In spite of, the improvement of ipsilateral side was higher than that of the contralateral side.
VL - 2
IS - 6
ER -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Amira Hussin Draz

Department of Basic Sciences, Faculty of Physical Therapy, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt
Amr Almaz Abdel-aziem

Department of Biomechanics, Faculty of Physical Therapy, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt
Mohamed Hisham Abo Elenain

Department of Basic Sciences, Faculty of Physical Therapy, Misr University for Science and Technology, Giza, Egypt

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Amira Hussin Draz, Amr Almaz Abdel-aziem, Mohamed Hisham Abo Elenain. (2014). Bilateral Effect of Unilateral Isokinetic Concentric Training and Russian Current Stimulation on Quadriceps Strength. American Journal of Health Research, 2(6), 350-355. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajhr.20140206.15

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Amira Hussin Draz; Amr Almaz Abdel-aziem; Mohamed Hisham Abo Elenain. Bilateral Effect of Unilateral Isokinetic Concentric Training and Russian Current Stimulation on Quadriceps Strength. Am. J. Health Res. 2014, 2(6), 350-355. doi: 10.11648/j.ajhr.20140206.15

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Amira Hussin Draz, Amr Almaz Abdel-aziem, Mohamed Hisham Abo Elenain. Bilateral Effect of Unilateral Isokinetic Concentric Training and Russian Current Stimulation on Quadriceps Strength. Am J Health Res. 2014;2(6):350-355. doi: 10.11648/j.ajhr.20140206.15

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ajhr.20140206.15,
  author = {Amira Hussin Draz and Amr Almaz Abdel-aziem and Mohamed Hisham Abo Elenain},
  title = {Bilateral Effect of Unilateral Isokinetic Concentric Training and Russian Current Stimulation on Quadriceps Strength},
  journal = {American Journal of Health Research},
  volume = {2},
  number = {6},
  pages = {350-355},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ajhr.20140206.15},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajhr.20140206.15},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ajhr.20140206.15},
  abstract = {Isokinetic training and Russian current stimulation have been advertised to increase muscle strength. So, the purpose of this study was to compare between unilateral isokinetic concentric training and Russian current stimulation on the quadriceps strength of ipsilateral and contralateral limbs. Sixty healthy male subjects were randomly assigned into 3 equal groups; Isokinetic group; received isokinetic concentric training. Russian group; received Russian current stimulation, and control group: did not receive any training program. Isokinetic and Russian groups trained for 4 weeks, 3 session/week on the dominant quadriceps femoris muscle. Biodex Multi-joint System 3, Biodex, Shirley, NY, used to measure the isokinetic concentric peak torque/body weight before and after 4 weeks training for all groups at angular velocity 30°/s. For contralateral and ipsilateral quadriceps strength there was significant increase in the quadriceps strength of isokinetic and Russain group (p= 0.000). However, there was no significant increase in the quadriceps strength of control group (p= 0.214, 0.061) respectively. There was no significant difference between isokinetic and Russian group for the value of increasing of the quadriceps strength (p= 0.391, 0.579) respectively. The percent of improvement of ipsilateral side was significantly higher than the improvement of contralateral side for isokinetic and Russian group (p= 0.004, 0.006) respectively. So, Isokinetic training and Russian current stimulation have equal level of effectiveness in improving the concentric strength of the contralateral and ipsilateral quadriceps muscle. In spite of, the improvement of ipsilateral side was higher than that of the contralateral side.},
 year = {2014}
}

Copy | Download