Cited by 139Muscle activation and electromyography studiesCardiovascular and exercise physiologyExercise and Physiological Responses

Assessment of low-frequency fatigue with two methods of electrical stimulation

Martin, V., Millet, G. Y., Martin, A., Deley, G., Lattier, G.·2004·Journal of Applied Physiology

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare the use of transcutaneous vs. motor nerve stimulation in the evaluation of low-frequency fatigue. Nine female and eleven male subjects, all physically active, performed a 30-min downhill run on a motorized treadmill. Knee extensor muscle contractile characteristics were measured before, immediately after (Post), and 30 min after the fatiguing exercise (Post30) by using single twitches and 0.5-s tetani at 20 Hz (P20) and 80 Hz (P80). The P20-to-P80 ratio was calculated. Electrical stimulations were randomly applied either maximally to the femoral nerve or via large surface electrodes (ES) at an intensity sufficient to evoke 50% of maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) during a 80-Hz tetanus. Voluntary activation level was also determined during isometric MVC by the twitch-interpolation technique. Knee extensor MVC and voluntary activation level decreased at all points in time postexercise (P < 0.001). P20 and P80 displayed significant time x gender x stimulation method interactions (P < 0.05 and P < 0.001, respectively). Both stimulation methods detected significant torque reductions at Post and Post30. Overall, ES tended to detect a greater impairment at Post in male and a lesser one in female subjects at both Post and Post30. Interestingly, the P20-P80 ratio relative decrease did not differ between the two methods of stimulation. The low-to-high frequency ratio only demonstrated a significant time effect (P < 0.001). It can be concluded that low-frequency fatigue due to eccentric exercise appears to be accurately assessable by ES.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1152/japplphysiol.00376.2004

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 31 · Cited by 139

Authors
Martin, V., Millet, G. Y., Martin, A., Deley, G., & Lattier, G.
Affiliations
Inserm (FR)
Venue
Journal of Applied Physiology
Published
2004-11
Volume
97
Issue
5
Pages
1923-1929
ISSN
  • 0161-7567 (ISSN-L)
  • 8750-7587
  • 1522-1601
OpenAlex
W2085671912
Cited by
139
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 7
FWCI
2.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Applied Physiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Funders
Conseil régional de Bourgogne-Franche-Comté
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Muscle activation and electromyography studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Exercise and Physiological Responses
Keywords
low-frequency fatigue, electrical stimulation, transcutaneous electrical stimulation, motor nerve stimulation, femoral nerve, knee extensors, eccentric exercise, downhill running, voluntary activation, sex differences
MeSH terms
Adult, Electrodes, Electrodiagnosis, Fatigue, Female, Femoral Nerve, Humans, Male, Muscle Contraction, Pain, Running, Sex Characteristics, Skin, Skinfold Thickness

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