4.4 Article

The Effects of Eccentric Exercise on Muscle Function and Proprioception of Individuals Being Overweight and Underweight

期刊

JOURNAL OF STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING RESEARCH
卷 27, 期 9, 页码 2542-2551

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e31827fc9a6

关键词

obesity; position sense; reaction time; force mismatch; muscle damage; delayed onset muscle soreness

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Paschalis, V, Nikolaidis, MG, Theodorou, AA, Deli, CK, Raso, V, Jamurtas, AZ, Giakas, G, and Koutedakis, Y. The effects of eccentric exercise on muscle function and proprioception of individuals being overweight and underweight. J Strength Cond Res 27(9): 2542-2551, 2013The aim of this study was to estimate the effect of being overweight or underweight on proprioception at rest and after muscle damaging eccentric exercise. Twelve lean, 12 overweight, and 8 underweight female participants performed an eccentric exercise session using the knee extensor muscles of the dominant leg. Muscle damage indices and proprioception were assessed up to 3 days postexercise. The results indicated that proprioception at baseline of the lean individuals was superior to that of the other 2 groups. The overweight individuals exhibited a smaller knee joint reaction angle to release than did the lean group, whereas the underweight individuals exhibited a larger reaction angle to release than did the lean group. After eccentric exercise, proprioception was affected more in the overweight and the underweight groups than in the lean group. The greater exercise-induced muscle damage appeared in the overweight group, and the deficient muscle mass of the underweight participants could explain in part the greater disturbances that appeared in proprioception in these 2 groups than for the lean counterparts. In conclusion, deviating from the normal body mass is associated with significant disturbances in the proprioception of the legs at rest and after participation in activities involving eccentric actions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据