The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
How long does the protective effect on eccentric exercise-induced muscle damage last?
Abstract
PURPOSE: One bout of eccentric exercise produces an adaptation that reduces muscle damage in subsequent bouts. Because it is not known how long this adaptation lasts, the present study investigated the maximal length of the attenuated changes in muscle damage indicators after high-force eccentric exercise. METHODS: Male students (N = 35) were placed into three groups and performed two bouts of eccentric exercise of the nondominant elbow flexors separated by either 6 (N = 14), 9 (N = 11), or 12 (N = 10) months. Maximal isometric force (MIF), range of motion (ROM), upper arm circumference (CIR), muscle soreness (SOR), and plasma creatine kinase activity (CK) were measured before and for 5 d after exercise. Magnetic resonance (MR) images of the transverse and longitudinal scans of the upper arm were taken 4 d after exercise. Changes in the criterion measures were compared between the first and second bouts and between groups by a two-way repeated measures ANOVA. RESULTS: A faster recovery in MIF was evident after a second bout performed at 6 or 9 months, and reduced SOR as well as smaller increases in CIR, CK, and T2 relaxation time of MR images also occurred after the second exercise bout at 6 months compared with initial responses. No significant differences between the bouts were found for ROM, and the 12-month group did not show any repeated bout effect. CONCLUSION: These results show that the repeated bout effect for most of the criterion measures lasts at least 6 months but is lost between 9 and 12 months.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
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
Muscle function after exercise-induced muscle damage and rapid adaptation
CLARKSON, P. M., NOSAKA, K., & BRAUN, B. (1992) · Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · doi:10.1249/00005768-199205000-00004 · Cited by 970 · cited 7×
“A large intersubject variability in plasma CK response and changes in other indicators of muscle damage after eccentric exercise is well recognized (5,18); however, the explanation for this phenomenon is not clear.”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialSelf-citation
Cited by
Egan, B., & Sharples, A. P. (2023) · Physiological Reviews · doi:10.1152/physrev.00054.2021 · Cited by 278
Howatson, G., Hoad, M., Goodall, S., Tallent, J., Bell, P. G., & French, D. N. (2012) · Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition · doi:10.1186/1550-2783-9-20 · Cited by 220
Skeletal Muscle Damage and Recovery
Kasper, C. E., Talbot, L. A., & Gaines, J. M. (2002) · AACN Clinical Issues: Advanced Practice in Acute and Critical Care · doi:10.1097/00044067-200205000-00009 · Cited by 96
Durkalec-Michalski, K., Jeszka, J., & Podgórski, T. (2017) · Nutrients · doi:10.3390/nu9070753 · Cited by 78
Brusco, C. M., Blazevich, A. J., Radaelli, R., Botton, C. E., Cadore, E. L., Baroni, B. M., Trajano, G. S., & Pinto, R. S. (2018) · Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports · doi:10.1111/sms.13068 · Cited by 32
Metadata
- Authors
- NOSAKA, K., SAKAMOTO, K., NEWTON, M., & SACCO, P.
- Venue
- Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
- Published
- 2001-09
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1490-1495
- ISSN
- 0195-9131 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2024539963
- Cited by
- 312
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 5.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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.