1
|
Alizadeh S, Edwards PF, Lockyer EJ, Holmes MWR, Power KE, Behm DG, Button DC. Neuromechanical Differences between Pronated and Supinated Forearm Positions during Upper-Body Wingate Tests. J Sports Sci Med 2024; 23:396-409. [PMID: 38841629 PMCID: PMC11149067 DOI: 10.52082/jssm.2024.396] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/22/2024] [Accepted: 05/02/2024] [Indexed: 06/07/2024]
Abstract
Arm-cycling is a versatile exercise modality with applications in both athletic enhancement and rehabilitation, yet the influence of forearm orientation remains understudied. Thus, this study aimed to investigate the impact of forearm position on upper-body arm-cycling Wingate tests. Fourteen adult males (27.3 ± 5.8 years) underwent bilateral assessments of handgrip strength in standing and seated positions, followed by pronated and supinated forward arm-cycling Wingate tests. Electromyography (EMG) was recorded from five upper-extremity muscles, including anterior deltoid, triceps brachii lateral head, biceps brachii, latissimus dorsi, and brachioradialis. Simultaneously, bilateral normal and propulsion forces were measured at the pedal-crank interface. Rate of perceived exertion (RPE), power output, and fatigue index were recorded post-test. The results showed that a pronated forearm position provided significantly (p < 0.05) higher normal and propulsion forces and triceps brachii muscle activation patterns during arm-cycling. No significant difference in RPE was observed between forearm positions (p = 0.17). A positive correlation was found between seated handgrip strength and peak power output during the Wingate test while pronated (dominant: p = 0.01, r = 0.55; non-dominant: p = 0.03, r = 0.49) and supinated (dominant: p = 0.03, r = 0.51; don-dominant: p = 0.04, r = 0.47). Fatigue changed the force and EMG profile during the Wingate test. In conclusion, this study enhances our understanding of forearm position's impact on upper-body Wingate tests. These findings have implications for optimizing training and performance strategies in individuals using arm-cycling for athletic enhancement and rehabilitation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shahab Alizadeh
- School of Human Kinetics and Recreation, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada
- Department of Kinesiology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Philip F Edwards
- School of Human Kinetics and Recreation, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada
| | - Evan J Lockyer
- School of Human Kinetics and Recreation, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada
- Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, NL, Canada
| | | | - Kevin E Power
- School of Human Kinetics and Recreation, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada
- Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, NL, Canada
| | - David G Behm
- School of Human Kinetics and Recreation, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada
| | - Duane C Button
- School of Human Kinetics and Recreation, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada
- Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, NL, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Compton CT, Lockyer EJ, Benson RJ, Power KE. Interhemispheric inhibition is different during arm cycling than a position- and intensity-matched tonic contraction. Exp Brain Res 2022; 240:2425-2434. [DOI: 10.1007/s00221-022-06413-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/15/2022] [Accepted: 07/01/2022] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
|
3
|
Lockyer EJ, Compton CT, Forman DA, Pearcey GE, Button DC, Power KE. Moving forward: methodological considerations for assessing corticospinal excitability during rhythmic motor output in humans. J Neurophysiol 2021; 126:181-194. [PMID: 34133230 DOI: 10.1152/jn.00027.2021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
The use of transcranial magnetic stimulation to assess the excitability of the central nervous system to further understand the neural control of human movement is expansive. The majority of the work performed to-date has assessed corticospinal excitability either at rest or during relatively simple isometric contractions. The results from this work are not easily extrapolated to rhythmic, dynamic motor outputs, given that corticospinal excitability is task-, phase-, intensity-, direction-, and muscle-dependent (Power KE, Lockyer EJ, Forman DA, Button DC. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab 43: 1176-1185, 2018). Assessing corticospinal excitability during rhythmic motor output, however, involves technical challenges that are to be overcome, or at the minimum considered, when attempting to design experiments and interpret the physiological relevance of the results. The purpose of this narrative review is to highlight the research examining corticospinal excitability during a rhythmic motor output and, importantly, to provide recommendations regarding the many factors that must be considered when designing and interpreting findings from studies that involve limb movement. To do so, the majority of work described herein refers to work performed using arm cycling (arm pedaling or arm cranking) as a model of a rhythmic motor output used to examine the neural control of human locomotion.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Evan J Lockyer
- Human Neurophysiology Lab, School of Human Kinetics and Recreation, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada.,Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada
| | - Chris T Compton
- Human Neurophysiology Lab, School of Human Kinetics and Recreation, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada.,Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada
| | - Davis A Forman
- Department of Human Health and Nutritional Sciences, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada
| | - Gregory E Pearcey
- Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois.,Department of Physiology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois.,Shirley Ryan Ability Lab, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Duane C Button
- Human Neurophysiology Lab, School of Human Kinetics and Recreation, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada.,Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada
| | - Kevin E Power
- Human Neurophysiology Lab, School of Human Kinetics and Recreation, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada.,Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada
| |
Collapse
|