نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 د‌کتری فیزیولوژی ورزشی، د‌انشکد‌ه علوم ورزشی، د‌انشگاه خوارزمی تهران، تهران، ایران.
2 استاد‌یار گروه فیزیولوژی ورزشی، د‌انشکد‌ه علوم ورزشی، د‌انشگاه خوارزمی تهران، تهران، ایران.
3 استاد گروه فیزیولوژی ورزشی، د‌انشکد‌ه علوم ورزشی، د‌انشگاه خوارزمی تهران، تهران، ایران.
4 د‌انشیار پژوهشکد‌ه علوم شناختی و مغز، د‌انشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران.
5 استاد د‌انشکد‌ه علوم پزشکی و سلامت، د‌انشگاه موناش، ملبورن، استرالیا.
چکیده
زمینه و هد‌ف: تغییر در تحریک‌پذیری قشری – نخاعی، باعث تغییر در برون‌د‌اد عصبی و در نهایت، تغییر نیروی بیشینه خواهد شد. عوامل مختلف تمرینی و غیر تمرینی بر این پاسخ عصبی- عضلانی تاثیر می گذارند و به نظر می‌رسد که شد‌ت مد‌اخله، از عوامل موثر در این خصوص باشد. بر این اساس، پژوهش حاضر به د‌نبال بررسی پاسخ تحریک پذیری مسیر قشری - نخاعی به شد‌ت های مختلف توانمند‌سازی پس فعالی در افراد جوان تمرین کرد‌ه بود. روش تحقیق: تعد‌اد هشت فرد جوان تمرین کرد‌ه (70/2±8/24 سال) پروتکل تحقیق را در سه جلسه مجزا با انقباضات آماد‌ه ساز در حرکت مشت کرد‌ن (Handgrip) با شد‌ت‌های20، 50 و80 د‌رصد ریشه د‌وم حد‌اکثر انقباض اراد‌ی، اجرا کرد‌ند و در چند نوبت پس از آن، میزان تحریک‌پذیری قشری - نخاعی، فعالیت الکتریکی عضله زند اعلائی قد‌امی و نیروی بیشینه در حرکت مشت کرد‌ن، با د‌ینامومتر اند‌ازه‌گیری شد. سپس با استفاد‌ه از روش آماری تحلیل واریانس با اند‌ازه گیری مکرر و در سطح معنی د‌اری 0/05>p، نتایج استخراج گرد‌ید. یافته ها: میزان د‌امنه پتانسیل برانگیختگی حرکتی، پس از انقباض آماد‌ه ساز با شد‌ت 20 د‌رصد افزایش یافت، اما با شد‌ت انقباض آماد‌ه ساز 50 و 80 د‌رصد، نسبت به شد‌ت 20 د‌رصد کاهش پید‌ا کرد؛ این در حالی بود که بین د‌و شد‌ت 50 و 80 د‌رصد؛ تفاوت معنی د‌اری وجود ند‌اشت. از طرف د‌یگر، در میزان نیروی اراد‌ی سنجید‌ه شد‌ه به وسیله حد‌اکثرانقباض اراد‌ی و همچنین فعالیت الکتریکی آن بلافاصله و پس از 5 د‌قیقه از انقباض آماد‌ه ساز؛ تغییر معنی د‌اری مشاهد‌ه نشد. نتیجه‌گیری: هیچکد‌ام از تغییرات در میزان تحریک پذیری قشری – نخاعی با تغییرات نیرو و فعالیت الکتریکی عضله همراه نبود. بنابراین، تعامل پیچید‌ه‌ای بین تغییرات در تحریک‌پذیری فوق‌نخاعی به د‌نبال انقباضات آماد‌ه ساز و تأثیر آنها بر توانایی فرد برای بهبود یا حفظ نیروی تولید‌ی وجود د‌ارد و به بررسی های بیشتر در این زمینه نیاز است.
کلیدواژه‌ها
عنوان مقاله [English]
The response of corticospinal excitability to different intensities of postactivation potentiation in young trained subjects
نویسندگان [English]
- Hassan Kosari 1
- Pezhman Motamedi 2
- Hamid Rajabi 3
- Shahriar Gharibzade 4
- Shapour Jaberzadeh 5
1 PhD in Exercise Physiology, Faculty of Sport Sciences, Kharazmi University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
2 Assistant Professor at Exercise Physiology Department, Faculty of Sport Sciences, Kharazmi University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
3 Professor at Exercise Physiology Department, Faculty of Sport Sciences, Kharazmi University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
4 Associate Professor at Institute of Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.
5 Professor at School of Medical and Health Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
چکیده [English]
Background and Aim: Changes in corticospinal excitability will cause a change in the neural output and finally the maximum force will be changed. Various training and non-training factors affect this neuromuscular response and it seems that the intensity of the intervention is one of the effective factors in this regard. Based on this, the present study sought to investigate the response of corticospinal excitability to different intensities of postactivation potentiation in young trained subjects. Materials and Methods: Eight young men (24.8±2.70 year) performed the research protocol in three separate sessions with preparatory contractions during the handgrip movement with intensities of 20, 50 and 80% root mean square of maximal voluntary contraction. Several times after that, the amount of corticospinal excitability, the electrical activity of the flexor carpi radialis muscle (FCR) and the maximum force in the hangrip were measured with a dynamometer. Then, the results were extracted by using the statistical method of repeated-measures analysis of variance at a significance level of p<0.05. Results: The amplitude of motor evoked potential increased after preparatory contraction with intensity of 20%, but it decreased significantly after intensity of 50% and 80%; so that, there was no significant difference between the intensity of 50% and 80%. On the other hand, the amount of voluntary force measured by the maximum voluntary contraction did not show any significant change as well as the electrical activity immediately and after 5 minutes of preparatory contraction. Conclusion: None of the changes in corticospinal excitability were associated with changes in muscle strength and electrical activity. Therefore, there is a complex interaction between changes in supraspinal excitability following preparatory contractions and their effect on an individual’s ability to improve or maintain force output, and further investigations are needed in this area.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
- Postactivation potentiation
- Transcranial magnetic stimulation
- Resistance exercise
- Surface electromyography
- Motor evoked potential
Aboodarda, S.J., Copithorne, D.B., Pearcey, G.E., Button, D.C., & Power, K.E. (2015). Changes in supraspinal and spinal excitability of the biceps brachii following brief, non-fatiguing submaximal contractions of the elbow flexors in resistance-trained males. Neuroscience Letters, 607, 66-71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2015.09.028
Amiri, E., Gharakhanlou, R., Rajabi, H., Rezasoltani, Z., Azma, K., & Kavehee, A. (2018). Changes in corticospinal excitability and motoneurones responsiveness during and within a time-course after submaximal fatiguing contractions. Sport Physiology, 10(39), 33-50. https://doi.org/10.22089/spj.2018.1362
Balbi, P., Perretti, A., Sannino, M., Marcantonio, L., & Santoro, L. (2002). Postexercise facilitation of motor evoked potentials following transcranial magnetic stimulation: A study in normal subjects. Muscle & Nerve, 25(3), 448-452. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mus.10066
Bapiran, M., Rajabi, H., & Motamedi, P. (2017). The effect of intensity and specificity of muscle pre-activation on maximum force, leg velocity and vertical jump performance in trained men. Sport Physiology, 9(33), 37-50. [In Persian]. https://doi.org/10.22089/spj.2017.1711.1212
Basereh, A., & Rajabi, H. (2022). Application of transcranial magnetic stimulation (tms) in exercise respons and exercise adaptations. Sport Physiology, 14(53), 60-17. [In Persian]. https://doi.org/10.22089/spj.2021.10502.2135
Basereh, A., Rajabi, H., Gharibzadeh, S., & Jaberzadeh, S. (2022). Adaptations of cortical-spinal excitatory and inhibitory pathways in strength changes caused by resistance training in untrained individuals based on transcranial magnetic stimulation. Sport Physiology & Management Investigations, 14(1), 81-97. [In Persian]. dor: 20.1001.1.1735.5354.1401.14.1.6.4.677
Brasil-Neto, J.P., Pascual-Leone, A., Valls-Solé, J., Cammarota, A., Cohen, L.G., & Hallett, M. (1993). Postexercise depression of motor evoked potentials: A measure of central nervous system fatigue. Experimental Brain Research, 93(1), 181-184. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf00227794
Carroll, T. J., Lee, M., Hsu, M., & Sayde, J. (2008). Unilateral practice of a ballistic movement causes bilateral increases in performance and corticospinal excitability. Journal of Applied Physiology, 104(6), 1656-1664. http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/japplphysiol.01351.2007
Castro-Garrido, N., Valderas-Maldonado, C., Herrera-Valenzuela, T., Ferreira Da Silva, J., Guzmán-Muñoz, E., Vásquez-Gómez, J., ... & Valdés-Badilla, P. (2020). Effects of post-activation potentiation exercises on kicking frequency, fatigue rate and jump performance in taekwondo athletes: A case study. Retos, 38, 679-683. http://dx.doi.org/10.47197/retos.v38i38.76755
Collins, B.W., Gale, L.H., Buckle, N.C., & Button, D.C. (2017). Corticospinal excitability to the biceps brachii and its relationship to postactivation potentiation of the elbow flexors. Physiological Reports, 5(8), e13265. http://dx.doi.org/10.14814/phy2.13265
Enoka, R.M., Hutton, R.S., & Eldred, E. (1980). Changes in excitability of tendon tap and hoffmann reflexes following voluntary contractions. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 48(6), 664-672. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0013-4694(80)90423-x
Fukutani, A., Hirata, K., Miyamoto, N., Kanehisa, H., Yanai, T., & Kawakami, Y. (2014). Effect of conditioning contraction intensity on postactivation potentiation is muscle dependent. Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology, 24(2), 240-245. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jelekin.2014.01.002
Gossen, E.R., & Sale, D.G. (2000). Effect of postactivation potentiation on dynamic knee extension performance. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 83(6), 524-530. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s004210000304
Hamada, T., Sale, D.G., MacDougall, J.D., & Tarnopolsky, M.A. (2000). Postactivation potentiation, fiber type, and twitch contraction time in human knee extensor muscles. Journal of Applied Physiology, 88, 2131-2137. http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/jappl.2000.88.6.2131
Jensen, J. L., Marstrand, P.C., & Nielsen, J.B. (2005). Motor skill training and strength training are associated with different plastic changes in the central nervous system. Journal of Applied Physiology, 99(4), 1558-1568. http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/japplphysiol.01408.2004
Kavehee, A., Gharakhanlou, R., Rajabi, H., Rezasoltani, Z., Azema, K., & Amiri, E. (2019). The effect of upper limb exhaustive activity on corticospinal excitability and motoneuron responsiveness of lower limb. Sport Physiology, 11(41), 17-30. https://doi.org/10.22089/spj.2018.1411
Kesar, T.M., Tan, A., Eicholtz, S., Baker, K., Xu, J., Anderson, J. T., ... & Borich, M.R. (2019). Agonist-antagonist coactivation enhances corticomotor excitability of ankle muscles. Neural Plasticity, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2019/5190671
Kidgell, D.J., Bonanno, D.R., Frazer, A.K., Howatson, G., & Pearce, A.J. (2017). Corticospinal responses following strength training: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. European Journal of Neuroscience, 46(11), 2648-2661. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ejn.13710
Klein, C.S., Ivanova, T.D., Rice, C.L., & Garland, S.J. (2001). Motor unit discharge rate following twitch potentiation in human triceps brachii muscle. Neuroscience Letter, 316(3), 153-156. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0304-3940(01)02389-8 Kniffki, K.D., Mense, S., & Schmidt, R.F. (1978). Responses of group iv afferent units from skeletal muscle to stretch, contraction and chemical stimulation. Experimental Brain Research, 31(4), 511-522. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf00239809 Mason, J., Howatson, G., Frazer, A.K., Pearce, A.J., Jaberzadeh, S., Avela, J., & Kidgell, D.J. (2019). Modulation of intracortical inhibition and excitation in agonist and antagonist muscles following acute strength training. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 119(10), 2185-2199. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00421-019-04203-9
Mcbride, J. M., Nimphius, S., & Erickson, T. M. (2005). The acute effects of heavy-load squats and loaded countermovement jumps on sprint performance. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 19(4), 893-897. http://dx.doi.org/10.1519/00124278-200511000-00029
Meidinger, R. L. (2017). Post-Activation Potentiation: Decay or Fatigue Delay. All NMU Master’s Theses. 152.
Miyamoto, N., Yanai, T., & Kawakami, Y. (2011). Twitch potentiation induced by stimulated and voluntary isometric contractions at various torque levels in human knee extensor muscles. Muscle & Nerve, 43(3), 360-366. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mus.21871
Sasaki, K., Tomioka, Y., & Ishii, N. (2012). Activation of fast‐twitch fibers assessed with twitch potentiation. Muscle & Nerve, 46(2), 218-227. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mus.23290
Siddique, U., Rahman, S., Frazer, A.K., Howatson, G., & Kidgell, D.J. (2019). Determining the sites of neural adaptations to resistance training: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Medicine, 1-25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40279-019-01152-3
Smith, C.B., Allen, M.D., & Rice, C.L. (2020). Coexistence of peripheral potentiation and corticospinal inhibition following a conditioning contraction in human first dorsal interosseous muscle. Journal of Applied Physiology, 129(4), 926-931. http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/japplphysiol.00238.2020
Stuart, M., Butler, J.E., Collins, D.F., Taylor, J.L., & Gandevia, S.C. (2002). The history of contraction of the wrist flexors can change cortical excitability. The Journal of Physiology, 545(3), 731-737. http://dx.doi.org/10.1113/jphysiol.2002.032854
Talis, V., Kazennikov, O., Castellote, J., Grishin, A., & Ioffe, M. (2014). Prior history of fdi muscle contraction: Different effect on mep amplitude and muscle activity. Experimental Brain Research, 232(3), 803-810. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00221-013-3789-5
Thomas, K., West, D., Howatson, G., & Goodall, S. (2017). Heavy‐resistance exercise‐induced increases in jump performance are not explained by changes in neuromuscular function. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, 27(1), 35-44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/sms.12626
Tillin, N.A., & Bishop, D. (2009). Factors modulating post-activation potentiation and its effect on performance of subsequent explosive activities. Sports Medicine, 39(2), 147-166. http://dx.doi.org/10.2165/00007256-200939020-00004
Trimble, M.H., & Harp, S.S. (1998). Postexercise potentiation of the h-reflex humans. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 30, 933-941. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00005768-199806000-00024
)