4.4 Article

The acute effects of static stretching on peak torque, mean power output, electromyography, and mechanomyography

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSIOLOGY
卷 93, 期 5-6, 页码 530-539

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00421-004-1199-x

关键词

contralateral; electromyography; mechanomyography; quadriceps femoris; stretch

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The purpose of this study was to examine the acute effects of static stretching on peak torque (PT), the joint angle at PT, mean power output (MP), electromyographic (EMG) amplitude, and mechanomyographic (MMG) amplitude of the vastus lateralis (VL) and rectus femoris (RF) muscles during maximal, voluntary concentric isokinetic leg extensions at 60 and 240 degrees center dot s(-1) of the stretched and unstretched limbs. Twenty-one volunteers [mean age (SD) 21.5 (1.3) years] performed maximal, voluntary concentric isokinetic leg extensions for the dominant and non-dominant limbs at 60 and 240 degrees center dot s(-1). Surface EMG (mu Vrms) and MMG (mVrms) signals were recorded from the VL and RF muscles during the isokinetic tests. PT (Nm), the joint angle at PT, and MP (W) were calculated by a dynamometer. Following the initial isokinetic tests, the dominant leg extensors were stretched using four static stretching exercises. After the stretching, the isokinetic tests were repeated. PT decreased (P <= 0.05) from pre- to post-stretching for the stretched limb at 60 and 240 degrees center dot s(-1) and for the unstretched limb at 60 degrees center dot s(-1). EMG amplitude of the VL and RF also decreased (P ! 0.05) from pre- to post-stretching for the stretched and unstretched limbs. There were no stretching-induced changes (P>0.05) for the joint angle at PT, MP, or MMG amplitude. These findings indicated stretching-induced decreases in force production and muscle activation. The decreases in PT and EMG amplitude for the unstretched limb suggested that the stretching-induced decreases may be due to a central nervous system inhibitory mechanism.

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