» Articles » PMID: 29951003

Functional Exercise Training and Undulating Periodization Enhances the Effect of Whole-Body Electromyostimulation Training on Running Performance

Overview
Journal Front Physiol
Date 2018 Jun 29
PMID 29951003
Citations 16
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The popularity of whole-body electromyostimulation is growing during the last years, but there is a shortage of studies that evaluate its effects on physical fitness and sport performance. In this study, we compared the effects of a periodized and functional whole-body-electromyostimulation training on maximum oxygen uptake (VOmax), ventilatory thresholds (VT1 and VT2), running economy (RE), and lower-body muscle strength in runners, vs. a traditional whole-body-electromyostimulation training. A total of 12 male recreational runners, who had been running 2-3 times per week (90-180 min/week) for at least the previous year and had no previous experience on WB-EMS training, were enrolled in the current study. They were randomly assigned to a periodized and functional whole-body-electromyostimulation training group (PFG) ( = 6; 27.0 ± 7.5 years; 70.1 ± 11.1 kg; 1.75 ± 0.05 m) whose training program involved several specific exercises for runners, or a traditional whole-body-electromyostimulation training group (TG) ( = 6; 25.8 ± 7.4 years; 73.8 ± 9.8 kg; 1.73 ± 0.07 m), whose sessions were characterized by circuit training with 10 dynamic and general exercises without external load. The training programs consisted of one whole-body electromyostimulation session and one 20-min running session per week, during 6 weeks. The PFG followed an undulating periodization model and a selection of functional exercises, whereas the TG followed a traditional session structure used in previous studies. Both groups were instructed to stop their habitual running training program. VOmax, VT1, VT2, RE, and lower body muscle strength (vertical jump) were measured before and after the intervention. The PFG obtained significantly higher improvements when compared with the TG in terms of VOmax (2.75 ± 0.89 vs. 1.03 ± 1.01 ml/kg/min, = 0.011), VT2 (2.95 ± 1.45 vs. 0.35 ± 0.85 ml/kg/min, = 0.005), VOmax percentage at VT2 (5.13 ± 2.41 vs. 0.63 ± 1.61%), RE at VT1 (-7.70 ± 2.86 vs. -3.50 ± 2.16 ml/kg/km, = 0.048), RE at 90% of VT2 (-15.38 ± 4.73 vs. -3.38 ± 4.11 ml/kg/km, = 0.005), and vertical jump in Abalakov modality (2.95 ± 0.94 vs. 0.52 ± 1.49 cm, = 0.008). Therefore, we conclude that running performance improvements were better after a 6-week program following an undulating periodization and consisting on functional exercises when compared with a 6-week traditional WB-EMS program.

Citing Articles

No beneficial effect of aerobic whole-body electromyostimulation on lower limbs strength and power - a randomized controlled trial.

Krause A, Centner C, Walther M, Memmert D, Walser N, Ritzmann R BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil. 2024; 16(1):144.

PMID: 38956590 PMC: 11218063. DOI: 10.1186/s13102-024-00931-4.


The Impact of Baseline Pain Intensity on the Effectiveness of Whole-Body Electromyostimulation (WB-EMS) for Nonspecific Chronic Back Pain.

Konrad K, Weissenfels A, Birkenmaier C, Baeyens J, Kemmler W, Wegener B Cureus. 2024; 16(4):e57858.

PMID: 38721185 PMC: 11078559. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.57858.


Non-Athletic Cohorts Enrolled in Longitudinal Whole-Body Electromyostimulation Trials-An Evidence Map.

Beier M, Schoene D, Kohl M, von Stengel S, Uder M, Kemmler W Sensors (Basel). 2024; 24(3).

PMID: 38339689 PMC: 10857049. DOI: 10.3390/s24030972.


Acute Effect of Electromyostimulation Superimposed on Running on Maximal Velocity, Metabolism, and Perceived Exertion.

Stephan H, Hagedorn T, Wehmeier U, Tomschi F, Hilberg T Biology (Basel). 2022; 11(4).

PMID: 35453792 PMC: 9028827. DOI: 10.3390/biology11040593.


Internet Survey of Risk Factors Associated With Training and Competition in Dogs Competing in Agility Competitions.

Pechette Markley A, Shoben A, Kieves N Front Vet Sci. 2022; 8:791617.

PMID: 35059455 PMC: 8764449. DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2021.791617.


References
1.
Filipovic A, Kleinoder H, Dormann U, Mester J . Electromyostimulation--a systematic review of the influence of training regimens and stimulation parameters on effectiveness in electromyostimulation training of selected strength parameters. J Strength Cond Res. 2011; 25(11):3218-38. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e318212e3ce. View

2.
Kemmler W, Bebenek M, Engelke K, von Stengel S . Impact of whole-body electromyostimulation on body composition in elderly women at risk for sarcopenia: the Training and ElectroStimulation Trial (TEST-III). Age (Dordr). 2013; 36(1):395-406. PMC: 3889893. DOI: 10.1007/s11357-013-9575-2. View

3.
Jones A, Carter H . The effect of endurance training on parameters of aerobic fitness. Sports Med. 2000; 29(6):373-86. DOI: 10.2165/00007256-200029060-00001. View

4.
Barnes K, Kilding A . Strategies to improve running economy. Sports Med. 2014; 45(1):37-56. DOI: 10.1007/s40279-014-0246-y. View

5.
Kemmler W, Schliffka R, Mayhew J, von Stengel S . Effects of whole-body electromyostimulation on resting metabolic rate, body composition, and maximum strength in postmenopausal women: the Training and ElectroStimulation Trial. J Strength Cond Res. 2010; 24(7):1880-7. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181ddaeee. View