Brownstein Callum G, Ansdell Paul, Škarabot Jakob, Frazer Ash, Kidgell Dawson, Howatson Glyn, Goodall Stuart, Thomas Kevin
Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Department of Sport, Exercise & Rehabilitation, Northumbria University, Newcastle, UK.
Department of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, School of Primary and Allied Health Care, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Exp Physiol. 2018 Sep;103(9):1251-1263. doi: 10.1113/EP086982. Epub 2018 Aug 5.
What is the central question of this study? In order to discern information about testing modalities when assessing neuroplastic responses to squat resistance training, the present study investigated whether corticospinal and intracortical function was different between a joint-angle-matched isometric squat and isometric knee extension. What is the main finding and its importance? The present data show poor agreement of corticospinal and intracortical function between the isometric squat and isometric knee extension. The data reinforce the notion that task specificity is of the utmost importance for assessing neuroplasticity.
It has been suggested that task-specific changes in neurophysiological function (neuroplasticity) should be assessed using testing modalities that replicate the characteristics of the intervention. The squat is a commonly prescribed resistance exercise that has been shown to elicit changes in CNS function. However, previous studies have assessed squat-induced neuroplasticity using isometric knee extension, potentially confounding the results. The aim of the present study was to assess the agreement between corticospinal and intracortical activity relating to the knee extensors during isometric knee extension compared with an isometric squat task. Eleven males completed a neurophysiological assessment in an isometric squat (IS) and knee-extension (KE) task matched for joint angles (hip, knee and ankle). Single- and paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation was delivered during isometric contractions at a range of intensities to assess short-interval cortical inhibition (SICI) and corticospinal excitability. Group mean values for SICI (70 ± 14 versus 63 ± 12% of unconditioned motor evoked potential during IS and KE, respectively) and corticospinal excitability (mean differences 2-5% of the maximal compound muscle action potential at 25, 50, 75 and 100% maximal voluntary contraction between the IS and KE) were not different between the two tasks (P > 0.05) in the vastus lateralis. However, limits of agreement were wide, with poor-to-moderate average intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) (SICI, ICC = 0.15; corticospinal excitability, average ICC range = 0.0-0.63), indicating disparate corticospinal and intracortical activity between the IS and KE. These data highlight the importance of task specificity when assessing the modulation of corticospinal excitability and SICI in response to interventions resulting in neuroplastic changes.
本研究的核心问题是什么?为了在评估深蹲抗阻训练的神经可塑性反应时辨别有关测试方式的信息,本研究调查了在关节角度匹配的等长深蹲和等长伸膝动作之间,皮质脊髓和皮质内功能是否存在差异。主要发现及其重要性是什么?目前的数据显示,等长深蹲和等长伸膝动作之间皮质脊髓和皮质内功能的一致性较差。这些数据强化了这样一种观念,即任务特异性对于评估神经可塑性至关重要。
有人提出,神经生理功能(神经可塑性)的任务特异性变化应使用能够复制干预特征的测试方式来评估。深蹲是一种常用的抗阻运动,已被证明能引起中枢神经系统功能的变化。然而,以往的研究使用等长伸膝动作来评估深蹲诱导的神经可塑性,这可能会混淆结果。本研究的目的是评估在等长伸膝动作与等长深蹲任务期间,与膝伸肌相关的皮质脊髓和皮质内活动之间的一致性。11名男性在髋关节、膝关节和踝关节角度匹配的等长深蹲(IS)和伸膝(KE)任务中完成了神经生理学评估。在等长收缩期间,以一系列强度进行单脉冲和双脉冲经颅磁刺激,以评估短间隔皮质抑制(SICI)和皮质脊髓兴奋性。外侧股四头肌在这两项任务之间,SICI的组均值(IS和KE期间分别为非条件运动诱发电位的70±14%和63±12%)和皮质脊髓兴奋性(在25%、50%、75%和100%最大自主收缩时,最大复合肌肉动作电位的均值差异为2 - 5%)并无差异(P>0.05)。然而,一致性界限较宽,组内相关系数(ICC)的平均水平为低到中等(SICI,ICC = 0.15;皮质脊髓兴奋性,平均ICC范围 = 0.0 - 0.63),表明IS和KE之间的皮质脊髓和皮质内活动存在差异。这些数据突出了在评估因导致神经可塑性变化的干预而引起的皮质脊髓兴奋性和SICI调制时,任务特异性的重要性。