Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 104Muscle Physiology and DisordersSpaceflight effects on biologyMuscle activation and electromyography studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 77 of the 77 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effect of Immobilisation on Neuromuscular Function In Vivo in Humans: A Systematic Review

Open access
Campbell, Matthew, Varley-Campbell, Jo, Fulford, Jon, Taylor, Bryan, Mileva, Katya N., Bowtell, Joanna L.·2019·Sports Medicine
DOI 10.1007/s40279-019-01088-8PMC PMC6548068
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Muscle strength loss following immobilisation has been predominantly attributed to rapid muscle atrophy. However, this cannot fully explain the magnitude of muscle strength loss, so changes in neuromuscular function (NMF) may be involved. OBJECTIVES: We systematically reviewed literature that quantified changes in muscle strength, size and NMF following periods of limb immobilisation in vivo in humans. METHODS: Studies were identified following systematic searches, assessed for inclusion, data extracted and quality appraised by two reviewers. Data were tabulated and reported narratively. RESULTS: Forty eligible studies were included, 22 immobilised lower and 18 immobilised upper limbs. Limb immobilisation ranged from 12 h to 56 days. Isometric muscle strength and muscle size declined following immobilisation; however, change magnitude was greater for strength than size. Evoked resting twitch force decreased for lower but increased for upper limbs. Rate of force development either remained unchanged or slowed for lower and typically slowed for upper limbs. Twitch relaxation rate slowed for both lower and upper limbs. Central motor drive typically decreased for both locations, while electromyography amplitude during maximum voluntary contractions decreased for the lower and presented mixed findings for the upper limbs. Trends imply faster rates of NMF loss relative to size earlier in immobilisation periods for all outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Limb immobilisation results in non-uniform loss of isometric muscle strength, size and NMF over time. Different outcomes between upper and lower limbs could be attributed to higher degrees of central neural control of upper limb musculature. Future research should focus on muscle function losses and mechanisms following acute immobilisation. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO reference: CRD42016033692.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s40279-019-01088-8

Cites

77 of 77 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Fig. 1 PRISMA flow diagram
Fig. 1 PRISMA flow diagramCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 2 Summary of immobilisation methods and body segments. N/R not reported
Fig. 2 Summary of immobilisation methods and body segments. N/R not reportedCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 3 Summary of methods used in the studies to evaluate neuromuscular function. EMG electromyography, N/R not reported
Fig. 3 Summary of methods used in the studies to evaluate neuromuscular function. EMG electromyography, N/R not reportedCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 4 Muscle strength and muscle size change per day. Muscle strength changes are shown as open circles, muscle size changes as closed diamonds
Fig. 4 Muscle strength and muscle size change per day. Muscle strength changes are shown as open circles, muscle size changes as closed diamondsCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 5 Muscle strength and resting twitch force change per day. Muscle strength changes are shown as open circles, resting twitch force changes as closed diamonds
Fig. 5 Muscle strength and resting twitch force change per day. Muscle strength changes are shown as open circles, resting twitch force changes as closed diamondsCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 6 Muscle strength and rate of force development change per day (a) and muscle strength and rate of force relaxation change per day (b). Muscle strength changes are shown as open circles, force development or relaxation changes as closed diamonds
Fig. 6 Muscle strength and rate of force development change per day (a) and muscle strength and rate of force relaxation change per day (b). Muscle strength changes are shown as open circles, force development or relaxation changes as closed diamondsCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 7 Muscle strength and central drive change per day. Muscle strength changes are shown as open circles, central drive changes as closed diamonds
Fig. 7 Muscle strength and central drive change per day. Muscle strength changes are shown as open circles, central drive changes as closed diamondsCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 8 Muscle strength and EMG change per day (a), muscle strength and Mwave amplitude change per day (b), muscle strength and motor evoked potential change per day (c), muscle strength and maximal Hoffman reflex amplitude change per day (d). Muscle strength changes are shown as open circles, other variables as closed diamonds. EMG electromyography
Fig. 8 Muscle strength and EMG change per day (a), muscle strength and Mwave amplitude change per day (b), muscle strength and motor evoked potential change per day (c), muscle strength and maximal Hoffman reflex amplitude change per day (d). Muscle strength changes are shown as open circles, other variables as closed diamonds. EMG electromyographyCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 9 Correlation between muscle strength and size change per day (a), muscle strength and resting twitch force (b), muscle strength and central drive (c), muscle strength and EMG (d). Lower limb values are shown as circles with a solid line, upper limb values as squares with a dotted line. Significant correlations are indicated with an asterisk (*). EMG electromyography
Fig. 9 Correlation between muscle strength and size change per day (a), muscle strength and resting twitch force (b), muscle strength and central drive (c), muscle strength and EMG (d). Lower limb values are shown as circles with a solid line, upper limb values as squares with a dotted line. Significant correlations are indicated with an asterisk (*). EMG electromyographyCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 10 Box plot graph showing the minimum, first quartile, median, third quartile and maximum of the immobilisation-induced changes per day of the investigated measures for strength, muscle size and neuromuscular function presented individually for lower (bottom panel) and upper (top panel) limb. Values shown are median/range. Amp amplitude, EMG electromyography, Hmax Hoffman reflex, MEP motor-evoked potential, n number
Fig. 10 Box plot graph showing the minimum, first quartile, median, third quartile and maximum of the immobilisation-induced changes per day of the investigated measures for strength, muscle size and neuromuscular function presented individually for lower (bottom panel) and upper (top panel) limb. Values shown are median/range. Amp amplitude, EMG electromyography, Hmax Hoffman reflex, MEP motor-evoked potential, n numberCC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 104

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Campbell, M., Varley-Campbell, J., Fulford, J., Taylor, B., Mileva, K. N., & Bowtell, J. L.
Affiliations
  • University of Exeter (GB)
  • University of Leeds (GB)
  • London South Bank University (GB)
Corresponding author
Campbell, Matthew
ORCID
Venue
Sports Medicine
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2019-03-21
Volume
49
Issue
6
Pages
931-950
ISSN
  • 0112-1642 (ISSN-L)
  • 1179-2035
DOI
10.1007/s40279-019-01088-8
PMC
PMC6548068
OpenAlex
W2923239346
Cited by
94
References
77
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 17
FWCI
0.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Update notices
correction (2019-04-04)
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Sports Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Open (London South Bank University) (acceptedVersion)
  • Research Open (London South Bank University) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Open Research Exeter (University of Exeter) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Muscle Physiology and Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology (medical) › Spaceflight effects on biology
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Muscle activation and electromyography studies
Keywords
neuromuscular function, muscle strength decline, muscle atrophy, muscle size, rate of force development, upper limb, lower extremity, disuse
MeSH terms
Electromyography, Humans, Immobilization, Muscle Contraction, Muscular Atrophy, Organ Size, Reflex, Muscle, Skeletal, Evoked Potentials, Motor, Upper Extremity, Lower Extremity, Muscle Strength

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.