Premium
Effect of preconditioning exercise on biceps brachii myotendinous junction displacement during elbow flexor eccentric exercise
Author(s) -
Ho ChihChiao,
Nosaka Kazunori,
Tseng KouWei,
Tseng WeiChin,
Lau WingYin,
Bogdanis Gregory C.,
Chen Trevor C.
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
scandinavian journal of medicine and science in sports
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.575
H-Index - 115
eISSN - 1600-0838
pISSN - 0905-7188
DOI - 10.1111/sms.13911
Subject(s) - eccentric , biceps , isometric exercise , medicine , elbow , concentric , delayed onset muscle soreness , anatomy , elbow flexion , contraction (grammar) , physical therapy , muscle damage , mathematics , physics , geometry , quantum mechanics
The present study tested the hypothesis that 30 low‐intensity (10%) eccentric contractions (10%EC) or two maximal voluntary isometric contractions at a long muscle length (2MVIC) that were performed at two days before maximal eccentric exercise of the elbow flexors consisting of five sets of six maximal eccentric contractions (MaxEC) would reduce increases in biceps brachii distal myotendinous junction displacement (MTJd) over the eccentric contractions during MaxEC. Sedentary young men were randomly placed (n = 12/group) to a control group that performed two bouts of MaxEC (CONT‐1st, CONT‐2nd) separated by two weeks, or one of two preconditioning groups that performed 10%EC or 2MVIC at 20° elbow flexion at two days prior to MaxEC. All exercises were performed by the non‐dominant arm. MTJd of each contraction was assessed by B‐mode ultrasound, and its changes over sets were compared among the groups. The average MTJd from the start to the end of six eccentric contractions in the first set was similar among the groups (6.4 ± 0.7 mm). The MTJd increased from the first to fifth set, but the increase was smaller ( P < .05) for the 10%EC (13 ± 6%) and 2MVIC (16 ± 9%) groups, and CONT‐2nd (3 ± 6%) when compared with CONT‐1st (60 ± 12%). Both 10%EC and 2MVIC groups showed smaller ( P < .05) changes in all muscle damage markers after MaxEC similarly when compared with CONT‐1st, but the changes were greater than those after CONT‐2nd. These results supported the hypothesis that protective effect was associated with less MTJd changes, suggesting that this is associated with the mechanisms underpinning the preconditioning effect on muscle damage.