4.4 Article

The influence of circulatory difference on muscle oxygenation and fatigue during intermittent static dorsiflexion

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSIOLOGY
Volume 91, Issue 5-6, Pages 682-688

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00421-003-1024-y

Keywords

muscle fatigue; electromyogram; near-infrared spectroscopy; body posture

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study aimed to examine the influences of circulatory difference on the utilization of O-2 and the progression of fatigue in the tibialis anterior (TA) muscle during dorsiflexion exercise, with reference to different body postures. The subjects performed intermittent static dorsiflexion at 50% of maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) up to exhaustion with the right leg either up or down relative to the heart. These exercises were performed with and without occluding muscle blood flow. Simultaneously with the surface electromyogram (EMG) measurement, total hemoglobin volume change and tissue oxygenation (StO2) of TA were measured using near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS). When the subjects performed an exhaustive intermittent dorsiflexion exercise at 50% MVC, the endurance time decreased in the leg up position. Also, the progression of fatigue in TA detected using EMG signals (i.e. integrated EMG and mean power frequency of EMG) was faster with the leg elevated. The NIRS data indicated a lower blood volume and StO2 with the leg up than with the leg down during the exercise, which suggests that the deficit in the O-2 supply to exercising muscle's demand was more apparent in the leg up position. However, these differences in EMG and NIRS data disappeared when the blood flow was restricted in both positions. From these results it is concluded that the difference in exercising muscle oxygenation between two different body postures influenced the progression of muscle fatigue and caused the difference in endurance performance.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available