↓ Skip to main content

Exercise-Induced Muscle Damage and Potential Mechanisms for the Repeated Bout Effect

Overview of attention for article published in Sports Medicine, September 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
patent
3 patents
facebook
2 Facebook pages
video
3 YouTube creators

Citations

dimensions_citation
257 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
342 Mendeley
Title
Exercise-Induced Muscle Damage and Potential Mechanisms for the Repeated Bout Effect
Published in
Sports Medicine, September 2012
DOI 10.2165/00007256-199927030-00002
Pubmed ID
Authors

Malachy P. McHugh, Declan A. J. Connolly, Roger G. Eston, Gilbert W. Gleim

Abstract

Unfamiliar, predominantly eccentric exercise, frequently results in muscle damage. A repeated bout of similar eccentric exercise results in less damage and is referred to as the 'repeated bout effect'. Despite numerous studies that have clearly demonstrated the repeated bout effect, there is little consensus as to the actual mechanism. In general, the adaptation has been attributed to neural, connective tissue or cellular adaptations. Other possible mechanisms include, adaptation in excitation-contraction coupling or adaptation in the inflammatory response. The 'neural theory' predicts that the initial damage is a result of high stress on a relatively small number of active fast-twitch fibres. For the repeated bout, an increase in motor unit activation and/or a shift to slow-twitch fibre activation distributes the contractile stress over a larger number of active fibres. Although eccentric training results in marked increases in motor unit activation, specific adaptations to a single bout of eccentric exercise have not been examined. The 'connective tissue theory' predicts that muscle damage occurs when the noncontractile connective tissue elements are disrupted and myofibrillar integrity is lost. Indirect evidence suggests that remodelling of the intermediate filaments and/or increased intramuscular connective tissue are responsible for the repeated bout effect. The 'cellular theory' predicts that muscle damage is the result of irreversible sarcomere strain during eccentric contractions. Sarcomere lengths are thought to be highly non-uniform during eccentric contractions, with some sarcomeres stretched beyond myofilament overlap. Loss of contractile integrity results in sarcomere strain and is seen as the initial stage of damage. Some data suggest that an increase in the number of sarcomeres connected in series, following an initial bout, reduces sarcomere strain during a repeated bout and limits the subsequent damage. It is unlikely that one theory can explain all of the various observations of the repeated bout effect found in the literature. That the phenomenon occurs in electrically stimulated contractions in an animal model precludes an exclusive neural adaptation. Connective tissue and cellular adaptations are unlikely explanations when the repeated bout effect is demonstrated prior to full recovery, and when the fact that the initial bout does not have to cause appreciable damage in order to provide a protective effect is considered. It is possible that the repeated bout effect occurs through the interaction of various neural, connective tissue and cellular factors that are dependent on the particulars of the eccentric exercise bout and the specific muscle groups involved.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 342 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 1%
United Kingdom 3 <1%
Spain 3 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
Iraq 1 <1%
Unknown 326 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 70 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 55 16%
Student > Bachelor 49 14%
Researcher 26 8%
Student > Postgraduate 16 5%
Other 65 19%
Unknown 61 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 141 41%
Medicine and Dentistry 39 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 29 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 3%
Other 33 10%
Unknown 78 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 August 2022.
All research outputs
#6,496,106
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine
#2,067
of 2,875 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,692
of 191,409 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine
#406
of 784 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,875 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 56.8. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 191,409 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 784 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.