» Articles » PMID: 36136389

Wide-Pulse High-Frequency Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation Evokes Greater Relative Force in Women Than in Men: A Pilot Study

Overview
Journal Sports (Basel)
Publisher MDPI
Specialty Public Health
Date 2022 Sep 22
PMID 36136389
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

This study aimed to examine the potential sex differences in wide-pulse high-frequency neuromuscular electrical stimulation (WPHF NMES)-evoked force. Twenty-two subjects (10 women) completed this study. Prior to the stimulation, the visual analogue scale (VAS) for discomfort and the rating of perceived exertion (RPE) were measured, followed by the isometric strength of the dominant elbow flexor muscles. The subjects then completed ten, 10-s on 10-s off WPHF NMES (pulse width: 1 ms, frequency: 100 Hz) at maximum tolerable intensities. The subjects' RPE was recorded after each set, and the VAS was measured following the last stimulation. The stimulation induced significant increase in discomfort for both sexes, with women having greater discomfort than men (men: 22.4 ± 14.9 mm, women: 39.7 ± 12.7 mm). The stimulation amplitude was significantly greater in men than in women (men: 16.2 ± 6.3 mA, women: 12.0 ± 4.5 mA). For the evoked force, only the relative NMES-evoked force was found greater in women than in men (men: 8.96 ± 6.51%, women: 17.08 ± 12.61%). In conclusion, even at the maximum tolerable intensity, WPHF NMES evoked larger relative elbow flexion force in women than in men, with women experiencing greater discomfort.

Citing Articles

Neuromuscular electrical stimulation at submaximal intensity combined with motor imagery increases corticospinal excitability.

Eon P, Grospretre S, Martin A Eur J Appl Physiol. 2024; 125(2):561-572.

PMID: 39356322 DOI: 10.1007/s00421-024-05615-y.


Effects of Unilateral Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation with Illusionary Mirror Visual Feedback on the Contralateral Muscle: A Pilot Study.

Ye X, Vala D, Walker H, Gaza V, Umali V, Brodoff P Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023; 20(4).

PMID: 36834447 PMC: 9962941. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph20043755.

References
1.
Paller C, Campbell C, Edwards R, Dobs A . Sex-based differences in pain perception and treatment. Pain Med. 2009; 10(2):289-99. PMC: 2745644. DOI: 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2008.00558.x. View

2.
Hunter S . The Relevance of Sex Differences in Performance Fatigability. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2016; 48(11):2247-2256. PMC: 5349856. DOI: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000000928. View

3.
Collins D . Central contributions to contractions evoked by tetanic neuromuscular electrical stimulation. Exerc Sport Sci Rev. 2007; 35(3):102-9. DOI: 10.1097/jes.0b013e3180a0321b. View

4.
Magnus C, Barss T, Lanovaz J, Farthing J . Effects of cross-education on the muscle after a period of unilateral limb immobilization using a shoulder sling and swathe. J Appl Physiol (1985). 2010; 109(6):1887-94. DOI: 10.1152/japplphysiol.00597.2010. View

5.
Martin A, Grospretre S, Vilmen C, Guye M, Mattei J, Fur Y . The Etiology of Muscle Fatigue Differs between Two Electrical Stimulation Protocols. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2016; 48(8):1474-84. DOI: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000000930. View