Muscle Function Laboratory, Institute of Sport Science and Sport Informatics, German Sport University, Cologne, Germany.
J Strength Cond Res. 2011 Nov;25(11):3218-38. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e318212e3ce.
Our first review from our 2-part series investigated the effects of percutaneous electromyostimulation (EMS) on maximal strength, speed strength, jumping and sprinting ability, and power, revealing the effectiveness of different EMS methods for the enhancement of strength parameters. On the basis of these results, this second study systematically reviews training regimens and stimulation parameters to determine their influence on the effectiveness of strength training with EMS. Out of about 200 studies, 89 trials were selected according to predefined criteria: subject age (<35 years), subject health (unimpaired), EMS type (percutaneus stimulation), and study duration (>7 days). To evaluate these trials, we first defined appropriate categories according to the type of EMS (local or whole-body) and type of muscle contraction (isometric, dynamic, isokinetic). Unlike former reviews, this study differentiates between 3 categories of subjects based on their level of fitness (untrained subjects, trained subjects, and elite athletes) and on the types of EMS methods used (local, whole-body, combination). Special focus was on trained and elite athletes. Untrained subjects were investigated for comparison purposes. The primary purpose of this study was to point out the preconditions for producing a stimulus above the training threshold with EMS that activates strength adaptations to give guidelines for implementing EMS effectively in strength training especially in high-performance sports. As a result, the analysis reveals a significant relationship (p < 0.05) between a stimulation intensity of ≥50% maximum voluntary contraction (MVC; 63.2 ± 19.8%) and significant strength gains. To generate this level of MVC, it was possible to identify guidelines for effectively combining training regimens (4.4 ± 1.5 weeks, 3.2 ± 0.9 sessions per week, 17.7 ± 10.9 minutes per session, 6.0 ± 2.4 seconds per contraction with 20.3 ± 9.0% duty cycle) with relevant stimulation parameters (impulse width 306.9 ± 105.1 microseconds, impulse frequency 76.4 ± 20.9 Hz, impulse intensity 63.7 ± 15.9 mA) to optimize training for systematically developing strength abilities (maximal strength, speed strength, jumping and sprinting ability, power).
我们的两部分系列研究中的第一部分研究了经皮肌电刺激（EMS）对最大力量、速度力量、跳跃和短跑能力以及力量的影响，揭示了不同 EMS 方法对增强力量参数的有效性。基于这些结果，本第二项研究系统地回顾了训练方案和刺激参数，以确定它们对 EMS 力量训练效果的影响。在大约 200 项研究中，根据预先确定的标准选择了 89 项试验：受试者年龄（<35 岁）、受试者健康状况（无损伤）、EMS 类型（经皮刺激）和研究持续时间（>7 天）。为了评估这些试验，我们首先根据 EMS 的类型（局部或全身）和肌肉收缩的类型（等长、动态、等速）来定义适当的类别。与以前的综述不同，本研究根据受试者的健康状况（未经训练的受试者、训练有素的受试者和精英运动员）和使用的 EMS 方法的类型（局部、全身、组合）将受试者分为三类进行区分。特别关注训练有素的和精英运动员。对未经训练的受试者进行了调查，以作比较。本研究的主要目的是指出使用 EMS 产生高于训练阈值的刺激的前提条件，该刺激激活力量适应，为在力量训练中有效实施 EMS 提供指导，特别是在高性能运动中。因此，分析结果表明，刺激强度与力量增益之间存在显著关系（p < 0.05），刺激强度≥50%最大自主收缩（MVC；63.2 ± 19.8%）可产生显著的力量增益。为了产生这种 MVC 水平，可以确定有效结合训练方案的指南（4.4 ± 1.5 周，每周 3.2 ± 0.9 次，每次 17.7 ± 10.9 分钟，每次收缩 6.0 ± 2.4 秒，占空比 20.3 ± 9.0%）和相关刺激参数（脉冲宽度 306.9 ± 105.1 微秒，脉冲频率 76.4 ± 20.9 Hz，脉冲强度 63.7 ± 15.9 mA），以优化训练，系统地发展力量能力（最大力量、速度力量、跳跃和短跑能力、力量）。
