| Title |
Flywheel resistance training calls for greater eccentric muscle activation than weight training
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Applied Physiology, July 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00421-010-1575-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| URN |
urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-45791
|
| Authors |
Lena Norrbrand, Marco Pozzo, Per A. Tesch |
| Abstract |
Changes in muscle activation and performance were studied in healthy men in response to 5 weeks of resistance training with or without "eccentric overload". Subjects, assigned to either weight stack (grp WS; n = 8) or iso-inertial "eccentric overload" flywheel (grp FW; n = 9) knee extensor resistance training, completed 12 sessions of four sets of seven concentric-eccentric actions. Pre- and post-measurements comprised maximal voluntary contraction (MVC), rate of force development (RFD) and training mode-specific force. Root mean square electromyographic (EMG(RMS)) activity of mm. vastus lateralis and medialis was assessed during MVC and used to normalize EMG(RMS) for training mode-specific concentric (EMG(CON)) and eccentric (EMG(ECC)) actions at 90°, 120° and 150° knee joint angles. Grp FW showed greater (p < 0.05) overall normalized angle-specific EMG(ECC) of vastii muscles compared with grp WS. Grp FW showed near maximal normalized EMG(CON) both pre- and post-training. EMG(CON) for Grp WS was near maximal only post-training. While RFD was unchanged following training (p > 0.05), MVC and training-specific strength increased (p < 0.05) in both groups. We believe the higher EMG(ECC) activity noted with FW exercise compared to standard weight lifting could be attributed to its unique iso-inertial loading features. Hence, the resulting greater mechanical stress may explain the robust muscle hypertrophy reported earlier in response to flywheel resistance training. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | 15% |
| France | 1 | 8% |
| Sweden | 1 | 8% |
| United States | 1 | 8% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 8% |
| Finland | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 6 | 46% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 85% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 8% |
| Scientists | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 321 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Poland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 317 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 52 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 52 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 34 | 11% |
| Researcher | 28 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 19 | 6% |
| Other | 57 | 18% |
| Unknown | 79 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 157 | 49% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 16 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 2% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 2% |
| Other | 25 | 8% |
| Unknown | 89 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 25 February 2020.
All research outputs
#1,978,742
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#649
of 4,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,844
of 103,289 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#5
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,345 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
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 103,289 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.