Kilohertz Frequency Alternating Current Induces Less Evoked Torque and Less Neuromuscular Efficiency Than Pulsed Current in Healthy People: A Randomized Crossover Trial.

Autor:	Paz, Isabel de Almeida, Sonda, Francesca Chaida, Fröhlich, Matias, Durigan, João Luiz Quagliotti, Vaz, Marco Aurélio
Předmět:	EVOKED potentials (Electrophysiology) TORQUE STATISTICS CONFIDENCE intervals PHYSICAL therapy ONE-way analysis of variance STRENGTH training RANDOMIZED controlled trials ELECTRIC stimulation BLIND experiment DESCRIPTIVE statistics REPEATED measures design QUESTIONNAIRES CROSSOVER trials STATISTICAL sampling ELECTROTHERAPEUTICS DATA analysis DATA analysis software REHABILITATION
Zdroj:	Journal of Sport Rehabilitation; Jul2023, Vol. 32 Issue 5, p540-548, 9p, 2 Diagrams, 2 Charts, 1 Graph
Abstrakt:	Context: Pulsed current and kilohertz frequency alternating current are 2 types of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) currents often used by clinicians during rehabilitation. However, the low methodological quality and the different NMES parameters and protocols used in several studies might explain their inconclusive results in terms of their effects in the evoked torque and the discomfort level. In addition, the neuromuscular efficiency (ie, the NMES current type that evokes the highest torque with the lowest current intensity) has not been established yet. Therefore, our objective was to compare the evoked torque, current intensity, neuromuscular efficiency (evoked torque/current intensity ratio), and discomfort between pulsed current and kilohertz frequency alternating current in healthy people. Design: A double-blind, randomized crossover trial. Methods: Thirty healthy men (23.2 [4.5] y) participated in the study. Each participant was randomized to 4 current settings: 2 kilohertz frequency alternating currents with 2.5 kHz of carrier frequency and similar pulse duration (0.4 ms) and burst frequency (100 Hz) but with different burst duty cycles (20% and 50%) and burst durations (2 and 5 ms); and 2 pulsed currents with similar pulse frequency (100 Hz) and different pulse duration (2 and 0.4 ms). The evoked torque, current intensity at the maximal tolerated intensity, neuromuscular efficiency, and discomfort level were evaluated. Results: Both pulsed currents generated higher evoked torque than the kilohertz frequency alternating currents, despite the similar between-currents discomfort levels. The 2 ms pulsed current showed lower current intensity and higher neuromuscular efficiency compared with both alternated currents and with the 0.4 ms pulsed current. Conclusions: The higher evoked torque, higher neuromuscular efficiency, and similar discomfort of the 2 ms pulsed current compared with 2.5-kHz frequency alternating current suggests this current as the best choice for clinicians to use in NMES-based protocols. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Databáze:	Complementary Index
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu