↓ Skip to main content

No Influence of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation on Exercise-Induced Pain and 5-Km Cycling Time-Trial Performance

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
62 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
No Influence of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation on Exercise-Induced Pain and 5-Km Cycling Time-Trial Performance
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, February 2017
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2017.00026
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrew W. Hibbert, François Billaut, Matthew C. Varley, Remco C. J. Polman

Abstract

Introduction: Afferent information from exercising muscle contributes to the sensation of exercise-induced muscle pain. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) delivers low-voltage electrical currents to the skin, inhibiting nociceptive afferent information. The use of TENS in reducing perceptions of exercise-induced pain has not yet been fully explored. This study aimed to investigate the effect of TENS on exercise-induced muscle pain, pacing strategy, and performance during a 5-km cycling time trial (TT). Methods: On three separate occasions, in a single-blind, randomized, and cross-over design, 13 recreationally active participants underwent a 30-min TENS protocol, before performing a 5-km cycling TT. TENS was applied to the quadriceps prior to exercise under the following conditions; control (CONT), placebo with sham TENS application (PLAC), and an experimental condition with TENS application (TENS). Quadriceps fatigue was assessed with magnetic femoral nerve stimulation assessing changes in potentiated quadriceps twitch force at baseline, pre and post exercise. Subjective scores of exertion, affect and pain were taken every 1-km. Results: During TTs, application of TENS did not influence pain perceptions (P = 0.68, [Formula: see text] = 0.03). There was no significant change in mean power (P = 0.16, [Formula: see text] = 0.16) or TT duration (P = 0.17, [Formula: see text] = 0.14), although effect sizes were large for these two variables. Changes in power output were not significant but showed moderate effect sizes at 500-m ([Formula: see text] = 0.10) and 750-m ([Formula: see text] = 0.10). Muscle recruitment as inferred by electromyography data was not significant, but showed large effect sizes at 250-m ([Formula: see text] = 0.16), 500-m ([Formula: see text] = 0.15), and 750-m ([Formula: see text] = 0.14). This indicates a possible effect for TENS influencing performance up to 1-km. Discussion: These findings do not support the use of TENS to improve 5-km TT performance.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 62 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 19%
Student > Master 9 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 6%
Student > Postgraduate 4 6%
Other 12 19%
Unknown 17 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 23%
Sports and Recreations 11 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Neuroscience 2 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Other 10 16%
Unknown 20 32%
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 25 February 2017.
All research outputs
#5,531,683
of 23,007,053 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#2,493
of 13,760 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,827
of 420,438 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#66
of 233 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,007,053 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,760 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 420,438 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 233 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.