About
Scope & Aims
Editorial office
Editorial board
Reviewers
Ethical standards and procedures
Abstracting and indexing
Contact
Articles & Issues
Current issue
Articles in press
Archive
For Authors
General rules
Guide for authors
Templates
Publication charge
For Reviewers
Guide for reviewers
Our reviewers
ORIGINAL PAPER
Comparison of contraction intensity and perceived intensity between dominant and non-dominant leg in sedentary adults
Wootaek Lim
1,2
1
Department of Physical Therapy, College of Health and Welfare, Woosong University, Daejeon, Republic of Korea
2
Woosong Institute of Rehabilitation Science, Woosong University, Daejeon, Republic of Korea
Submission date: 2020-09-21
Acceptance date: 2020-12-07
Publication date: 2023-01-05
Physiother Quart. 2023;31(1):13-18
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Introduction:
Accurate measurement of isometric contraction intensity is a prerequisite for establishing an exercise program and developing a rehabilitation plan. Despite numerous studies performed previously, there is no research on sedentary populations susceptible to injury during exercise. Additionally, although dominant and non-dominant legs showed differences in muscle properties, the legs were not separately investigated. The purposes of this study were to compare the contraction intensity with target intensity and with perceived intensity across 3 different target intensities in sedentary adults and examine the difference between the dominant and non-dominant leg.
Methods:
Voluntary isometric contractions were performed with resistance provided by a sling rope and measured with a strain gauge during hip extension. First, maximum voluntary contraction (MVC) was executed; subsequently, submaximal contractions at target intensities (75%, 50%, and 25% of MVC) were randomly performed. Perceived intensity was measured at each target intensity.
Results:
Hip extension forces were significantly different across the 3 intensities (p < 0.001), with no significant difference between target intensity and contraction intensity or between perceived intensity and contraction intensity. There was no significant difference between the dominant and non-dominant leg. Bland-Altman analysis of the agreement between perceived and contraction intensities revealed a proportional bias for the values within each target intensity (mean bias: –1.15%, standard deviation of bias: 20.96).
Conclusions:
Sedentary subjects were able to distinguish 3 different contraction intensities. Perceived intensity could statistically significantly predict contraction intensity. However, clinicians should note that under- or overestimation can occur regardless of the level of target intensity.
Accurate measurement of isometric contraction intensity is a prerequisite for establishing an exercise program and developing a rehabilitation plan. Despite numerous studies performed previously, there is no research on sedentary populations susceptible to injury during exercise. Additionally, although dominant and non-dominant legs showed differences in muscle properties, the legs were not separately investigated. The purposes of this study were to compare the contraction intensity with target intensity and with perceived intensity across 3 different target intensities in sedentary adults and examine the difference between the dominant and non-dominant leg.
Methods:
Voluntary isometric contractions were performed with resistance provided by a sling rope and measured with a strain gauge during hip extension. First, maximum voluntary contraction (MVC) was executed; subsequently, submaximal contractions at target intensities (75%, 50%, and 25% of MVC) were randomly performed. Perceived intensity was measured at each target intensity.
Results:
Hip extension forces were significantly different across the 3 intensities (p < 0.001), with no significant difference between target intensity and contraction intensity or between perceived intensity and contraction intensity. There was no significant difference between the dominant and non-dominant leg. Bland-Altman analysis of the agreement between perceived and contraction intensities revealed a proportional bias for the values within each target intensity (mean bias: –1.15%, standard deviation of bias: 20.96).
Conclusions:
Sedentary subjects were able to distinguish 3 different contraction intensities. Perceived intensity could statistically significantly predict contraction intensity. However, clinicians should note that under- or overestimation can occur regardless of the level of target intensity.
REFERENCES (40)
1.
Feland JB, Marin HN. Effect of submaximal contraction intensity in contract-relax proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation stretching. Br J Sports Med. 2004;38(4):E18; doi: 10.1136/bjsm.2003.010967.
2.
Khodayari B, Dehghani Y. The investigation of mid-term effect of different intensity of PNF stretching on improve hamstring flexibility. Procedia Soc Behav Sci. 2012;46:5741–5744; doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.508.
3.
Sheard PW, Paine TJ. Optimal contraction intensity during proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation for maximal increase of range of motion. J Strength Cond Res. 2010;24(2):416–421; doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181c50a0d.
4.
Lim W. Easy method for measuring stretching intensities in real clinical settings and effects of different stretching intensities on flexibility. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil. 2019;32(4):579–585; doi: 10.3233/BMR-181243.
5.
Lim W. The effects of proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation and static stretching performed at various intensities on hamstring flexibility [in Korean]. Phys Ther Korea. 2020;27(1):30–37.
6.
Sheard PW, Smith PM, Paine TJ. Athlete compliance to therapist requested contraction intensity during proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation. Man Ther. 2009;14(5):539–543; doi: 10.1016/j.math.2008.08.006.
7.
Lindsay DM, Horton JF, Vandervoort AA. A review of injury characteristics, aging factors and prevention programmes for the older golfer. Sports Med. 2000;30(2):89–103; doi: 10.2165/00007256-200030020-00003.
8.
Skille EÅ. Sport for all in Scandinavia: sport policy and participation in Norway, Sweden and Denmark. Int J Sport Policy Politics. 2011;3(3):327–339; doi: 10.1080/19406940.2011.596153.
9.
McVeigh JA, Zhu K, Mountain J, Pennell CE, Lye SJ, Walsh JP, et al. Longitudinal trajectories of television watching across childhood and adolescence predict bone mass at age 20 years in the Raine Study. J Bone Miner Res. 2016;31(11):2032–2040; doi: 10.1002/jbmr.2890.
10.
Peterson NE, Sirard JR, Kulbok PA, DeBoer MD, Erickson JM. Sedentary behavior and physical activity of young adult university students. Res Nurs Health. 2018;41(1):30–38; doi: 10.1002/nur.21845.
11.
Robertson RJ, Noble BJ. Perception of physical exertion: methods, mediators, and applications. Exerc Sport Sci Rev. 1997;25:407–452; doi: 10.1249/00003677-199700250-00017.
13.
Nybo L, Nielsen B. Perceived exertion is associated with an altered brain activity during exercise with progressive hyperthermia. J Appl Physiol. 2001;91(5):2017–2023; doi: 10.1152/jappl.2001.91.5.2017.
14.
Suminski R, Robertson RJ, Arslanian S, Kang J, Utter A, DaSilva SG, et al. Perception of effort during resistance exercise. J Strength Cond Res. 1997;11(4):261–265.
15.
Marcora S. Perception of effort during exercise is independent of afferent feedback from skeletal muscles, heart, and lungs. J Appl Physiol. 2009;106(6):2060–2062; doi: 10.1152/japplphysiol.90378.2008.
16.
Daneshjoo A, Rahnama N, Mokhtar AH, Yusof A. Bilateral and unilateral asymmetries of isokinetic strength and flexibility in male young professional soccer players. J Hum Kinet. 2013;36:45–53; doi: 10.2478/hukin-2013-0005.
17.
Krajnc Z, Vogrin M, Recnik G, Crnjac A, Drobnic M, Antolic V. Increased risk of knee injuries and osteoarthritis in the non-dominant leg of former professional football players. Wien Klin Wochenschr. 2010;122(Suppl. 2):40–43; doi: 10.1007/s00508-010-1341-1.
18.
Haskell WL, Lee I-M, Pate RR, Powell KE, Blair SN, Franklin BA, et al. Physical activity and public health: updated recommendation for adults from the American College of Sports Medicine and the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2007;116(9):1081–1093; doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.185649.
19.
Tremblay MS, Aubert S, Barnes JD, Saunders TJ, Carson V, Latimer-Cheung AE, et al. Sedentary Behavior Research Network (SBRN) – Terminology Consensus Project process and outcome. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2017;14(1):75; doi: 10.1186/s12966-017-0525-8.
20.
Gerdle B, Karlsson S, Crenshaw AG, Fridén J. The relationships between EMG and muscle morphology throughout sustained static knee extension at two submaximal force levels. Acta Physiol Scand. 1997;160(4):341–351; doi: 10.1046/j.1365-201X.1997.00167.x.
21.
Mannion AF, Dolan P. Relationship between myoelectric and mechanical manifestations of fatigue in the quadriceps femoris muscle group. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol. 1996;74(5):411–419; doi: 10.1007/bf02337721.
22.
Pincivero DM, Coelho AJ, Campy RM, Salfetnikov Y, Bright A. The effects of voluntary contraction intensity and gender on perceived exertion during isokinetic quadriceps exercise. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2001;84(3):221–226; doi: 10.1007/s004210170008.
23.
Pincivero DM, Coelho AJ, Erikson WH. Perceived exertion during isometric quadriceps contraction. A comparison between men and women. J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 2000;40(4):319–326.
24.
Muaidi QI. Does gender make a difference in knee rotation proprioception and range of motion in healthy subjects? J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil. 2017;30(6):1237–1243; doi: 10.3233/BMR-169613.
25.
Yang N, Waddington G, Adams R, Han J. Age-related changes in proprioception of the ankle complex across the lifespan. J Sport Health Sci. 2019;8(6):548–554; doi: 10.1016/j.jshs.2019.06.003.
26.
Peters M. Footedness: asymmetries in foot preference and skill and neuropsychological assessment of foot movement. Psychol Bull. 1988;103(2):179–192; doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.103.2.179.
27.
Van Melick N, Meddeler BM, Hoogeboom TJ, Nijhuis-van der Sanden MWG, van Cingel REH. How to determine leg dominance: the agreement between self-reported and observed performance in healthy adults. PLoS One. 2017;12(12):e0189876; doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0189876.
28.
Barbieri FA, Gobbi LTB, Santiago PRP, Cunha SA. Dominant-non-dominant asymmetry of kicking a stationary and rolling ball in a futsal context. J Sports Sci. 2015;33(13):1411–1419; doi: 10.1080/02640414.2014.990490.
29.
Tarkka IM, Hallett M. Cortical topography of premotor and motor potentials preceding self-paced, voluntary movement of dominant and non-dominant hands. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1990;75(2):36–43; doi: 10.1016/0013-4694(90)90150-i.
30.
Morishige Y, Harato K, Kobayashi S, Niki Y, Matsumoto M, Nakamura M, et al. Difference in leg asymmetry between female collegiate athletes and recreational athletes during drop vertical jump. J Orthop Surg Res. 2019;14(1):424; doi: 10.1186/s13018-019-1490-5.
31.
Guan Y, Bredin S, Taunton J, Jiang Q, Wu L, Kaufman K, et al. Bilateral difference between lower limbs in children practicing laterally dominant vs. non-laterally dominant sports. Eur J Sport Sci. 2021;21(8):1092–1100; doi: 10.1080/17461391.2020.1814425.
32.
Chalmers G. Re-examination of the possible role of Golgi tendon organ and muscle spindle reflexes in proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation muscle stretching. Sports Biomech. 2004;3(1):159–183; doi: 10.1080/14763140408522836.
33.
Toffin D, McIntyre J, Droulez J, Kemeny A, Berthoz A. Perception and reproduction of force direction in the horizontal plane. J Neurophysiol. 2003;90(5):3040–3053; doi: 10.1152/jn.00271.2003.
34.
Lee DC, Ham YW, Sung PS. Effect of visual input on normalized standing stability in subjects with recurrent low back pain. Gait Posture. 2012;36(3):580–585; doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2012.05.020.
35.
Pincivero DM, Dixon PT, Coelho AJ. Knee extensor torque, work, and EMG during subjectively graded dynamic contractions. Muscle Nerve. 2003;28(1):54–61; doi: 10.1002/mus.10393.
36.
Chastin SFM, Ferriolli E, Stephens NA, Fearon KCH, Greig C. Relationship between sedentary behaviour, physical activity, muscle quality and body composition in healthy older adults. Age Ageing. 2012;41(1):111–114; doi: 10.1093/ageing/afr075.
37.
Farr JN, Van Loan MD, Lohman TG, Going SB. Lower physical activity is associated with skeletal muscle fat content in girls. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2012;44(7):1375–1381; doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e31824749b2.
38.
Pentidis N, Mersmann F, Bohm S, Giannakou E, Aggelousis N, Arampatzis A. Triceps surae muscle-tendon unit properties in preadolescent children: a comparison of artistic gymnastic athletes and non-athletes. Front Physiol. 2019;10:615; doi: 10.3389/fphys.2019.00615.
39.
Doğan NÖ. Bland-Altman analysis: a paradigm to understand correlation and agreement. Turk J Emerg Med. 2018;18(4):139–141; doi: 10.1016/j.tjem.2018.09.001.
40.
Pincivero DM, Thomas SM. The effects of knee joint angle and contractor intensity on perceived exertion. Percept Mot Skills. 2018;125(6):1123–1139; doi: 10.1177/0031512518797859.
Share
RELATED ARTICLE
| eISSN: | 2544-4395 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
