Random motor unit activation by electrostimulation.

Whether the involvement of motor units is different between surface neuromuscular electrostimulation and voluntary activation remains an unresolved issue. The aim of this pilot study was to verify if motor unit activation during electrostimulation is nonselective/random (i.e., without obvious sequencing related to fibre type), as recently suggested by Gregory and Bickel [6]. Sixteen healthy men randomly performed submaximal isometric contractions (10-s duration) of the quadriceps femoris muscle at 20, 40 and 60 % of maximal voluntary torque under both stimulated and voluntary conditions. During the contractions, paired stimuli were delivered to the femoral nerve (twitch interpolation technique) and the characteristics of the superimposed doublet were compared between the two conditions. For each torque level, time-to-peak torque was significantly longer (p range = 0.05 - 0.0002) during electrostimulation compared to voluntary contractions. Moreover, time-to-peak torque during voluntary trials decreased significantly when increasing the torque level from 20 to 60 % of maximal voluntary torque (p range = 0.03 - 0.0001), whereas it was unchanged during electrostimulation. In conclusion, over-the-muscle electrostimulation would neither result in motor unit recruitment according to Henneman's size principle nor would it result in a reversal in voluntary recruitment order. During electrostimulation, muscle fibres are activated without obvious sequencing related to fibre type.

[1]  R. Lieber,et al.  Factors influencing quadriceps femoris muscle torque using transcutaneous neuromuscular electrical stimulation. , 1991, Physical therapy.

[2]  J. Duchateau,et al.  Motor unit recruitment order during voluntary and electrically induced contractions in the tibialis anterior , 1997, Experimental Brain Research.

[3]  S A Binder-Macleod,et al.  Effects of stimulation intensity on the physiological responses of human motor units. , 1995, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[4]  J. Duchateau,et al.  Twitch analysis as an approach to motor unit activation during electrical stimulation. , 1994, Canadian journal of applied physiology = Revue canadienne de physiologie appliquee.

[5]  R. Conwit,et al.  The relationship of motor unit size, firing rate and force , 1999, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[6]  R. Enoka,et al.  Mechanisms underlying the training effects associated with neuromuscular electrical stimulation. , 1991, Physical therapy.

[7]  C. D. De Luca,et al.  Inference of motor unit recruitment order in voluntary and electrically elicited contractions. , 1990, Journal of applied physiology.

[8]  Chris M Gregory,et al.  Recruitment patterns in human skeletal muscle during electrical stimulation. , 2005, Physical therapy.

[9]  D. Lake Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation , 1992, Sports medicine.

[10]  R. Enoka Activation order of motor axons in electrically evoked contractions , 2002, Muscle & nerve.

[11]  Shi Zhou,et al.  Assessing Voluntary Muscle Activation with the Twitch Interpolation Technique , 2004, Sports medicine.

[12]  Gabrielle Todd,et al.  Measurement and reproducibility of strength and voluntary activation of lower‐limb muscles , 2004, Muscle & nerve.

[13]  G. Dudley,et al.  Mapping of electrical muscle stimulation using MRI. , 1993, Journal of applied physiology.