Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation Does Not Enhance Recovery From Maximal Exercise.
Refereed Original Article
To investigate the use of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) during 8 acute recovery between 2 bouts of maximal aerobic exercise. Methods: On 3 separate days, 19 trained male cyclists (28±7 yr; 76.4±10.4 kg; PV O2max (power output atV 9 O2max) 417±44 W) performed a 3 min maximal cycling bout at 105% PV 10 O2max, prior to a 30 min randomly 11 assigned recovery intervention of either: i) Passive (PAS: resting); ii) Active (ACT: 30% PV 12 O2max); or iii) NMES (5 Hz / 4 pulses at 500 μs). Immediately after, a cycle bout at 95% P V 13 O2max to exhaustion (TLIM) was performed. Heart rate (HR) and blood lactate (BLa) were 14 recorded at designated time-points. Data were analyzed using repeated measures ANOVA 15 with Tukey’s HSD post hoc. Statistical significance threshold was P<0.05. Results: The 16 TLIM was significantly shorter for NMES compared to ACT (vs. 199.6 ± 69.4s vs. 250.7 ± 17 105.5s: P=0.016), but not PAS recovery (199.6 ± 69.4s vs. 216.4 ± 77.5s: P=0.157). The 18 TLIM was not significantly different between ACT and PAS (250.7 ± 105.5s vs. 216.4 ± 77.5s: 19 P=0.088). The decline in BLa was significantly greater during ACT compared to NMES and 20 PAS recovery (P < 0.001), with no difference between NMES and PAS. Also, HR was 21 significantly higher during ACT compared to NMES and PAS recovery (P < 0.001), with no 22 difference between NMES and PAS. Conclusions: NMES was less effective than ACT and 23 comparable to PAS recovery when used between two bouts of maximal aerobic exercise in 24 trained male cyclists.
Digital Object Identifer (DOI):
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPORTS PHYSIOLOGY AND PERFORMANCE
National University of Ireland, Dublin (UCD)
Open access repository: