Exercise-Induced Muscle Soreness After Concentric and Eccentric Isokinetic Contractions
The putpose of this two-part study was to determine whether the amount of exercise-induced muscle soreness dt$ers between subjects who [email protected]
concentric and eccentric isokinetic contractions of their quudricepsfernoris muscles. In expenenmat1, subjects were randomly asngned to either an eccentric or a concentric exercise group and both p u p s exercised at the sane power level. In experiment 2, subjects were randomly assCpned to either a n eccentric or a concentric exercise p u p and both groups exercised with maximal efort. Muscle soreness ratings, obtained by m'ng a visual analogue scale, were taken immediately before exercise and at 2 4 and 4 8 hours postexercise. Changes in muscle soreness ratings between exercise p u p s from preexercise to postexercise periods were compared in both experiments, using a one-way between-subjects analysis of variance. There was no [email protected]
in the change in muscle soreness from pwexercise to postbetween p u p s exercising at equal power levels. Subjects who exercise penenods exercked using eccentric contractions with maximal efort demonstrated greater increases in muscle soreness than those who [email protected]
concentrk contractions. The results suggest that exercise intm'ty, rather than contraction type, may be the dependentfactor in producing exercise-induced muscle soreness. [Fitzgerald GI( Rothstein JM, Mayhew TP, Lumb RL.Exercise-induced muscle soreness after concentrk and eccentric isokinetic contractions Phys Thm 1991;71505-513.1
Q Kelley Fltzgerald Jules M Rothsteln Thomas P Mayhew Robert L Lamb
Key Words: Exercise, general; Muscle contraction;Muscle [email protected]
, lower extremity.
Participants in exercise programs may, after exercise, experience muscle
soreness. Exercises that induce this soreness are thought to require
GK Fitzgerald, MS, F'T, is Assistant Professor, D e p a m e n t of Orthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation, Program in Physical Therapy, Hahnemann University, MS 502, 201 N 15th St, Philadelphia, PA 19102 (USA). This study was completed in partial fulfillment of the requirements for Mr Fitzgerald's Master of Science degree, Medical College of Virginia, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA. Address all correspondence to Mr Fiugerald.
JM Rothstein, PhD, PT,is Professor and Head, D e p a m e n t of Physical Therapy, College of Associated Health Professions, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, and Chief of Physical Therapy Services, University of Illinois Hospital, 1919 W Taylor St, Chicago, IL 60612.
TP Mayhew, MS, F'T,is Assistant Professor, Department of Physical Therapy, School of Allied Health Professions, Medical College of Virginia, Virginia Commonwealth University, PO Box 224, MCV Station, Richmond, VA 23298-0024. RL Iamb, PhD, F'T, is Associate Professor and Chairman, Department of Physical Therapy, School of Allied Health Professions, Medical College of Virginia, Virginia Commonwealth University.
This study was approved by the Committee on Human Research, Virginia Commonwealth University.
greater use of muscles than an individual's regular level of physical activity. Because the soreness is usually not felt until 8 to 12 hours after cessation of an exercise session, some authorsl4 refer to exercise-induced muscle soreness as "delayed onset muscle soreness." The intensity of exercise-induced muscle soreness increases during the first 24 to 48 hours after exercise and gradually subsides over the next several days.1 The soreness is most likely to be felt when the muscle contracts, but there are reports of pain when the muscle belly is palpated and also of "muscular stiffness" (eg, a feeling of increased resistance to passive lengthening of the muscle).ls3~5
This article was submitted September 4, 1990, and was accepted March 5, 1991
16/ 505 Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ptj/article-abstract/71/7/505/2728793 by East Carolina University user on 07 April 2018
Physical Therapy /Volume 71, Number 7/July 1991
Many investigator^^^^^ have concluded that exercises requiring the use of eccentric muscle contractions will result in greater muscle soreness than exel-cises that require mostly concentrllc contractions. Although isokinetic exercises are commonly used in clinical practice, the effect of these types of exercises, which involve corlcentric and eccentric contractions, has not been studied. Some researchers have stated that, when the: same amount of torque is produced by a muscle during concentric and eccentric contractions, fewer motor urdts are recruited during the eccentric c o n t r a ~ t i o nArmstrong' .~~~ and Asmussen2 believe that the risk of damage to muscle and its associated connective tissue is greater during eccentric contractions than during concentr~iccontractions, because less muscle tissue is contracting when producing a given torque. These authors believe that exercise-induced muscle soreness associated with eccentric rr~usclecontractions is probably due to damage to muscle or connective tissue caused by overload of these tissues. Studies comparing the magnitudes of exercise-induced muscle soreness produced after concentric and eccentric muscle contractions have usually lacked adlequate controls of exercise intensity.;!As6JAlthough some researchers have concluded that eccentric muscle contractions cause greater muscle soreness than concentric muscle contractions, methodological problems in their stuclies cast doubt on these conclusions. Subjects in some studies,4.6 for exam,ple,were asked to perform concentric and eccentric contractions against different loads of resistance and for varyir~gnumbers of repetitions. Observed differences in the magnitude of the soreness may have been due to differences in the intensity of the exercises rather than to the type of muscle contraction. The inter~sityof exercise can be controlled by training subjects to perform concentrilc and eccentric muscle contractions at the same power level. Some dynamometers allow limb seg-
ments to move at constant velocities during concentric and eccentric contractions. Subjects who produce equal amounts of torque during concentric and eccentric contractions at the same velocity of movement are exercising at equal power levels. Isokinetic exercise devices provide the means for appropriate comparisons of exerciseinduced muscle soreness produced by concentric and eccentric muscle contractions. We conducted two experiments to examine the variables influencing the development of soreness. In the first experiment, we wanted to determine whether there was a contraction-typedependent difference in the amount of exercise-induced muscle soreness in subjects who exercised at equal levels of power. The purpose of the second experiment was to determine whether there was a contraction-typedependent difference in the amount of exercise-induced muscle soreness in the quadriceps femoris muscles of subjects who exercise at maximal effort. We believed that when concentric and eccentric contractions were performed at 90% of the maximum power produced during concentric quadriceps femoris muscle contraction, the torque produced during the contractions would probably not be great enough to cause tissue damage. If tissue damage did occur, we believed there would probably be no difference in the amount of tissue damage between exercise groups. We therefore hypothesized that there would be no difference in the magnitude of quadriceps femoris muscle soreness after exercise in subjects who performed concentric and eccentric isokinetic contractions at equal power levels. We believed that, with maximal effort, greater levels of torque would be produced during eccentric contractions than during concentric contractions and that tissue damage would thus be more likely to occur from the eccentric contractions than from the concentric contractions. We therefore hypothesized that, when subjects ex-
Physical Therapy /Volume 71, Number 7 /July 1991 Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ptj/article-abstract/71/7/505/2728793 by East Carolina University user on 07 April 2018
ercised at maximal effort, there woulct be greater quadriceps femoris muscle soreness in subjects who performed eccentric isokinetic contractions than in those who performed concentric isokinetic contractions.
Method This study consisted of two experiments. In experiment 1, comparisons were made between groups exercising at equal levels of power. In experiment 2, comparisons were made between groups exercising with maximal effort. The methods used in both experiments were similar. Different subjects were used in each experiment.
Subjects in both experiments were nondisabled volunteers with no complaints of pain in their right lower extremities and no history of knee or quadriceps femoris muscle pathology. Subjects did not regularly participate in activities requiring intense use of lower-extremity muscles. Analgesic, anti-inflammatory,or any other type of medication that would affect neuromuscular function was not taken by subjects for a minimum of 1 week prior to the study. All subjects signed an informed consent form before participating in the study. Twenty subjects participated in experiment 1. These subjects were randomly assigned to groups that performed either concentric or eccentric muscle contractions at a target power level equivalent to 90% of the maximum power produced during concentric contraction of their quadriceps femoris muscles. Six subjects were eliminated from the study because they were unable to maintain the target power level during exercise. These subjects were replaced by subjects who were able to maintain the target power level, so that each group would consist of 10 subjects. The concentric contraction group consisted of 9 women and 1 man, with an age range of 21 to 34 years @=24.6, SD=3.9). The eccentric contraction group consisted of 7 women and
3 men, with an age range of 21 to 36 years @=27. j, SD=5.7). An additional 20 subjects participated in experiment 2. These subjects were randomly assigned to groups of 10 subjects each who performed either concentric o r eccentric muscle contractions with maximal effort. The ability to maintain a specific power level was not a factor in experiment 2. Therefore, no subjects were eliminated in this experiment. The concentric contraction group consisted of 6 women and 4 men, with an age range of 21 to 34 years @=27.1, SD= 53). The eccentric contraction group consisted of 8 women and 2 men, with an age range of 21 to 39 years @=26.4, SD= 59).
Instrumentation The instrumentation was the same in both experiments. A [email protected]
* was used to measure the power produced during contractions and to provide resistance during the exercise portion of the study. The voltage output from the force, angle, and velocity transducers (from the [email protected]
"sstrain gauge, potentiometer, and tachometer) was processed through an AMMl Analog-to-Digital Board in a Keithley DAS Measurement and Control System (series 500).+ Data acquisition was controlled using DADISP I software (version 1.01).$ The frequency of analog-to-digital conversion was 250 Hz. The calibration of the [email protected]
'force and angle recordings was tested before data collection began. Calibration was retested at the completion of data collection. The results of the prestudy and poststudy calibration testing indicated that the [email protected]
not lose calibration during testing. A visual analogue scale (VAS) was
used to measure muscle soreness
"no sensation of soreness"
"worst sensation of soreness Imaginable"
Figure 1. Visual analogue scale for measuring muscle soreness. The scale was 10 cm in length.
(Fig. 1). The VAS has been shown to be reliable and valid as a ratio-scale measure of both clinical and experimental pain.9 Muscle soreness was always measured during maximal isometric contractions of the right quadriceps femoris muscle.
Procedure The experimental procedure in experiments 1 and 2 consisted of five sessions. These sessions were conducted on five consecutive days. A summary of the procedures used in each session is outlined in Figure 2.
Initial Evaluation The subject sat on the [email protected]
'table with the right hip flexed to 90 degrees and the right leg next to the [email protected]
"slever arm. The right hip position was determined by visual inspection. After the subject was positioned, a back support was placed behind the subject. The location of the back support was recorded so that the support could be placed in the same position during subsequent testing sessions. The subject's right knee joint was aligned with the axis of rotation of the dynamometer's lever arm. The most prominent aspect of the right lateral femoral epicondyle was used as an anatomical landmark to represent the axis of rotation of the knee joint. The pad of the dynamometer's lever arm was attached to the subject's right leg, 1 cm proximal to the medial malleolus. The distance from the center
*Chattea Corp, 101 Memorial Dr, PO Box 4287, Chattanooga, TN 37405.
of the pad to the lever arm's axis of rotation was recorded and was later used to calculate torque values. After the subject's limb length was determined, the back support was removed. The subject was then brought to a supine position on the [email protected]
in preparation for determination of a gravity-correction value. The supine position was selected for two reasons. Preliminary observations indicated that, if the subject's knee was fully extended while sitting, tension in the hamstring muscles increased the value of the force exerted by the limb on the lever arm (Sheryl Finucane, PT, personal communication). Preliminary studies also indicated that limb weight measurements were most accurate when the lever arm was close to the horizontal position. The supine position, therefore, allowed measurements of limb weights and eliminated the effects of hamstring muscle tension on the measurements. The "gravity-correction" option on the [email protected]
was used to determine limb weight with the limb fully extended. After the gravity-correction procedure was completed, the subject was repositioned in sitting as previously described. Straps were placed firmly across the subject's pelvis and also across the middle portion of the subject's right thigh. The subject's knee was positioned in 90 degrees of flexion. A goniometer was used to determine the angle of flexion. A value of 90 degrees was then entered into the computer, using the [email protected]
's"anatomical joint reference" option. This ensured that the computer's lever arm angle recording was equivalent to the subject's knee joint angle.
+KeithleyData Acquisition and Control Inc, 28775 Aurora Rd, Cleveland, OH 44139. *DSP Development Corp, 55 Cambridge Pkwy, Cambridge, MA 02142.
18 / 507 Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ptj/article-abstract/71/7/505/2728793 by East Carolina University user on 07 April 2018
Physical TherapyIVolume 71, Number 71July 1991
stant velocity occurred. The lever arm initial force "forth" was set at 150% of the limb weight value determined during the gravity-correction procedure. The lever arm initial force "back" was set at zero to allow for passive return of the limb to the start position.
INITIAL EVALUATION SESSION Pre xercise VA Ratin Determine.Eoncentnc daximu8 Power Determ~n Tra~n~n Tar et Power Deterrnlneain-~omg~ a k e Values r
1 PRACTICE SESSION 1 I
SESSION Experiment 1
EXERCISE SESSION Experiment 2
90% Concentric Maximum Power Postpractice VAS Rating E:xerc~seTra~n~ng Sesslon
Maximal Effort Post racticq VAS Rating ~xer#seTra~n~ng Sesslon
I 24-HOUR POS'TEXERCISE Soreness Rating Session
48-HOUR POSTEXERCISE Soreness Rating Session
Figure 2. Summay ofprocedures used in experiments I and 2 (VAS=uisual analogue scale.)
After the anatomical joint reference procedure was completed, preexercise baseline muscle soreness ratings were taken. The subject's knee was positioned at 60 degrees of flexion. The subject was then instructed to perform a maximal isometric contraction of the quadriceps femoris muscle and to maintain this contraction for 3 seconds. Immediately following the isometric contraction, the subject was asked to use the VAS to rate the magnitude of' muscle soreness perceived in the quadriceps femoris muscle during the contraction. The subject placed a mark on the VAS that indicated the magnitude of muscle soreness experienced. The distance from the extreme left of the VAS to the subject's mark was measured to the nearest millimeter. This value was used as the subject's soreness rating. The subject rested for 5 minutes. The soreness rating procedure was then repeated. Two soreness ratings were taken during each soreness rating session so that test-retest reliability of soreness measurements could be determined. After the muscle soreness ratings were obtained, maximum concentric quadriceps femoris muscle power was determined using the Kin-ComB's
evaluation program. A start angle of 90 degrees and a stop angle of 15 degrees for lever arm motion were entered into the computer. The velocity of lever arm motion was set at 3Oo/s.Lever arm acceleration and deceleration were set at "high" to maximize the time period in which con-
Subjects were instructed to perform 10 maximal concentric quadriceps femoris muscle contractions. Preliminary studies, performed by one of the authors (GKF), indicated that subjects would produce their maximal concentric contraction within 10 contractions. A 45-second rest period was given between each contraction. Peak torque, average torque! and average speed from the 10 maximal concentric quadriceps femoris muscle contractions were calculated using DADISP II The power produced during each of these contractions was calculated by multiplying the average torque by the average speed of the contraction. After the power produced by each contraction was calculated, the contraction producing the greatest amount of power was identified. The training target power level was 90% of the power produced during this contraction.
Figure 3. Schematic diagram of,force markers as displayed on [email protected]
computer monitor. Subjects were asked to maintain their torque tracings between the murkers,for as long as possible. Awou~indicates direction of increasing,force.
Physical Therapy / Volume 71, Number 7 /July 1991 Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ptj/article-abstract/71/7/505/2728793 by East Carolina University user on 07 April 2018
508 / 19
Preliminary studies performed by the authors were used to develop the training protocol. We found that subjects could maintain the training target power level when force markers that could be used as targets to control torque output were displayed on the [email protected]
'scomputer monitor. A diagram of these force markers is provided in Figure 3. We also found that different force marker values had to be used for concentric and eccentric contraction exercise groups so that the same training target power level could be maintained. Marker values for subjects performing concentric contractions were set at 85% and 95% of the peak torque from the concentric contraction that produced maximum power. Marker values for subjects performing eccentric contractions were set at 65% and 75% of the peak torque from the concentric contraction that produced maximum power. Because the [email protected]
cannot display markers in units of torque, marker values were converted to units of force (newtons).
Practice Session Subjects were seated on the [email protected]
as described for the initial evaluation. Program settings in the [email protected]
'sevaluation mode were the same as those previously described, except that subjects performing eccentric contractions had a value of zero for the initial force "forth" setting. Their initial force "back" setting was 150% of their limb weight. Values for the force markers were entered into the [email protected]
After the rest period, subjects performed 10 quadriceps femoris muscle contractions, while attempting to maintain their torque tracings within the marker boundaries. A 20-second rest period was provided between contractions. This was the amount of time needed for the computer to process force, speed, and angle data. Force, speed, and angle voltage signals were processed for each of these 10 contractions for subjects in experiment 1. In experiment 2, these signals were not recorded for the 10 contractions performed by subjects.
femoris muscle contractions. In preliminary studies, we determined that subjects who performed concentric contractions were unable to maintain the desired level of power for more than seven sets of 10 contractions. Subjects in experiment 1 were asked to maintain force levels for each contraction within the marker boundaries displayed on the computer monitor. Subjects in experiment 2 were asked to perform each contraction with maximal effort. A 2-minute rest period was provided between each set of 10 contractions in both experiments.
In experiment 1, immediately following the practice session, the power produced during each contraction was calculated as previously described for the initial evaluation. The power produced by each contraction was expressed as a percentage of the target power. If the mean percentage of the target power was not within &20% of the target power, the subject was eliminated from the study. The subject was eliminated from the study because it was unlikely that he o r she would maintain the target power level during exercise.
To ensure that subjects in experiment 1 were exercising at 90% of maximum concentric power, 2 contractions from each set of 10 contractions were randomly selected for calculations of power production. Therefore, a total of 14 contractions per subject were sampled for power calculations. Subjects in experiment 1 were eliminated from the study if a minimum of 10 sampled contractions did not fall within & 10% of the target power.
Power was not calculated for the contractions performed by subjects in experiment 2. The ability to maintain a specific power level was not a factor in this experiment. These subjects participated in the practice session so that they would be performing amounts of physical activity similar to those performed by the subjects in experiment 1.
The 24-hour and 48-hour postexercise soreness ratings were taken during sessions 4 and 5, respectively. The method for measuring soreness in these sessions was the same as that described for the initial evaluation.
Exercise Session For practice, depending on group assignment, subjects were instructed to perform either 10 concentric or 10 eccentric quadriceps femoris muscle contractions. Subjects were asked to push against the lever arm in such a way as to maintain the torque tracing for as long as possible within the marker boundaries displayed on the computer monitor. No time limit was used during the practice period. A 2-minute rest period followed the 10 practice contractions.
Subjects were seated on the [email protected]
as described for the initial evaluation. Two postpractice soreness ratings were then obtained, using the method described for the initial evaluation. After the postpractice soreness ratings were taken, the settings for the [email protected]
'sevaluation mode were entered into the computer as described for the practice session. Depending on group assignment, subjects were asked to perform seven sets of 10 concentric or eccentric quadriceps
Postexercise Soreness Rating Sessions
Dependent Measures The dependent measure used for statistical analysis was the difTerence in soreness ratings from the postpractice soreness rating session to the postexercise rating sessions. The postpractice ratings were used as baseline ratings, because any change in soreness ratings that may have occurred from participation in the evaluation and practice sessions would be reflected in these soreness ratings. The preexercise soreness ratings, therefore, were not used in the statistical analysis.
Statistical Analysis The same statistical analyses were used in both experiments. The VAS
Physical Therapy /Volume 71, Number 7 / J y 1991 Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ptj/article-abstract/71/7/505/2728793 by East Carolina University user on 07 April 2018
Table 1. Summaty of Visual Analogue Scale Muscle Soreness Ratings (in Centimeters)
Table 2. One-way Between-Subjects Analysis-of-Variance Summaty for Experiment I Postpractice Soreness Data
Contraction tY Pe Error
0.00-1 .OO 0.91
Experiment 2' Concentric group
"Baseline=postpractice visual analogue scale ratings.
A one-way between-subjects analysis o f variance (ANOVA) was used to analyze the VAS soreness data. Three separate comparisons were made between groups. The first comparison was made to determine whether there was a difference between the groups' soreness ratings taken during the postpractice rating session (immediately before the exercise session). 'I'he second and third comparisons were made to determine whether changes in VAS soreness ratings occurred at 24 and 48 hours postexercise, respectively.
bExercise performed at 90% of concentric maximum power
'Exercise performed with maximal effort
has been shown to be reliable and valid as a, ratio-scaled measure of pain.9 Parametric statistical tests are therefore appropriate for analyzing VAS data. An intrac:lass correlation coefficient
(ICC[~,~]:I was used to determine testretest re1:iability of VAS soreness ratings for the postpractice rating session.10 Test-retest reliability of the postpractice ratings was determined by comparing the first rating with the second rating taken during session 3. The ICC for this comparison was .74 in experiment 1 and .67 in experiment 2. An ICC (1,l) was also used to deter-
mine test-retest reliability of the differences in soreness ratings between postpractice and postexercise soreness rating sessions. The difference between the first postpractice rating and the first 24-hour postexercise rat-
ing was compared with the difference between the second postpractice rating and the second 24-hour postexercise rating. The ICC for this comparison was .35 in experiment 1 and .89 in experiment 2. Test-retest reliability for the difference between postpractice and 48-hour postexercise ratings was determined in the same manner as that described for the 24hour postexercise ratings. The ICC for this comparison was .57 in experiment 1 and .94 in experiment 2. The ICCs indicate that the differences in soreness ratings from postpractice to postexercise rating sessions demonstrated poor reliability in experiment 1. These same comparisons in experiment 2 demonstrated relatively good reliability. This finding will need to be considered when interpreting the results of experiment 1.
Physical 'Therapy /Volume 71, Number 7 /July 1991 Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ptj/article-abstract/71/7/505/2728793 by East Carolina University user on 07 April 2018
Experiment 1 A summary of raw VAS muscle soreness data is presented in Table 1. The difference in muscle soreness ratings from the postpractice to the postexercise rating sessions was calculated from these data for each subject. The differences in muscle soreness ratings from the postpractice to the postexercise sessions were then compared between groups. We believed these comparisons would be more meaningful than comparing raw VAS data between groups. Between-subject comparisons are problematic using our design because of differences in baseline data and because of individual differences. The results of a one-way betweensubjects ANOVA for postpractice muscle soreness ratings are summarized in Table 2. No significant difference was found between groups. This find-
Table 3. One-way Between-Subjects Analysis-ofVariance Summaryfor Experiment I Postpractice-24 Hour Postexercise Soreness Data
Table 5. One-Way Between-Subjects Analysis-of Variance Sz~mmaryfor Experiment 2 Postpractice Soreness Data Source
ing suggests that the groups were similar in rating muscle soreness of their quadriceps femoris muscles prior to the exercise portion of test session 3.
Contraction type Error
was found between groups for this comparison. This finding suggests that the groups were similar in rating muscle soreness of their quadriceps femoris muscles before the exercise portion of test session 3.
When the same amount of torque is produced by a muscle during concentric and eccentric contractions, fewer motor units are recruited during the eccentric ~ontraction.~." Armstrong' and Asmussen2 believe that exerciseinduced muscle soreness associated with eccentric contractions is probably due to damage to muscle o r connective tissue caused by overloading of these tissues. They believe that the risk of damage to muscle and its associated connective tissue is greater during eccentric contractions than during concentric contractions, because less muscle tissue is contracting when resisting a given force. Experiment 1 of this study examined the change in muscle soreness ratings from preexercise to postexercise conditions in subjects who performed concentric or eccentric muscle contractions at equal levels of power. Because the velocity of movement was constant, subjects were actually producing the same levels of torque. If, at the same levels of torque production, there is greater risk of tissue damage during eccentric contractions than during concentric contractions, as hypothesized by Armstrong1 and Asmussen? subjects who performed eccentric contractions should have had greater increases in postexercise muscle soreness than those who performed concentric contractions in experiment 1. No significant differ-
The results of a one-way betweensubjects ANOVA for postpractice muscle soreness ratings are summarized in Table 5. No significant difference
The results of one-way betweensubjects ANOVAs for comparisons between groups of the difference in soreness ratings from the postpractice rating session to the 24-hour and 48hour postexercise rating sessions are summarized in Tables 6 and 7, respectively. The subjects who performed eccentric quadriceps femoris muscle contractions with maximal effort reported a greater increase in muscle soreness after exercise than those who performed concentric contractions at 24 hours postexercise. The difference in soreness ratings at 48 hours postexercise was similar for both groups.
Table 4. One-way Between-subjects Analysis-of Variance Summary for Experiment I Postpractice-48 Hour Postexercise Soreness Data
Table 6. One-way Between-Subjects Analysis-ofVariance Summary for Experiment 2 Postpractice-24 Hour Postexercise Soreness Data
Table 7. one-way Between-Subjects ~nalysis-ojVarianceSummary for Fxperiment 2 Postpractice-48 Hour Postexercise Soreness Data
The results of one-way betweensubjects ANOVAs for comparisons between groups of the difference in soreness ratings from the postpractice rating session to the 24-hour and 48hour postexercise rating sessions are summarized in Tables 3 and 4, respectively. The difference in soreness ratings at 24 and 48 hours postexercise was similar for both groups.
- - Experiment 2
Contraction type Error Total
Contraction type Error
aF=4.18; df=1,18; P S . 0 5 .
Physical Therapy /Volume 71, Number 7 /July 1991 Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ptj/article-abstract/71/7/505/2728793 by East Carolina University user on 07 April 2018
ence was found in the change in quadriceps femoris muscle soreness at 24 and 48 hours postexercise between groups. This finding does not support Armstrong'sl and Asmussen's2 hypothesis. The reliability of our muscle soreness measurernents in experiment 1 appeared to be poor. No significant difference may have been found between gr~oupsbecause the reliability of the soreness measurements was questionable. When subjects were asked whether they were experiencing muscle soreness during functional activities (eg, walking, stooping, stair climbing) at 24 and 48 hours postexercise, there was no report of muscle soreness from subjects in either group. We believe, therefore, that there probably was no difference in muscle soreness between groups postexercise.
method. In these studies, the power produced during muscle contractions was not equal for different contraction types. Subjects who performed eccentric muscle contractions in these studies probably produced greater levels of power than did those who performed concentric contractions. Subjects who performed eccentric contractions probably experienced greater muscle soreness because they exercised at greater intensities than did those who exercised with concentric contractions.
There are no reports that compare the difference in the magnitudes of muscle soreness produced after concentric and eccentric isokinetic muscle contractions. When our subjects exercised with maximal effort in experiment 2, there was greater muscle soreness at 24 hours postexercise in subjects who performed eccentric muscle contractions than in those who performed concentric contracThe reliability of muscle soreness tions. The muscle soreness measuremeasurements performed by other ments in experiment 2 appeared to researchers who studied exercisebe reliable. When subjects in experiinduced muscle soreness after conment 2 were asked whether they excentric a.nd eccentric contractions is not kno~wn.Various investigator~2-!+~6,7 perienced muscle soreness during functional activities 24 and 48 hours did not indicate the reliability of their soreness measurements, yet they conafter session 3, only subjects who percluded that eccentric contractions formed eccentric contractions reproduce greater postexercise muscle ported soreness. soreness than do concentric contractions. Because the reliability of their The results of experiment 2 indicate soreness measurements is unknown, that, when subjects are asked to perthe extent to which their results may form muscle contractions with maxibe attributed to measurement error mal effort, greater muscle soreness cannot be determined. Our results, occurs after eccentric contractions although they should be considered than after concentric contractions. in the context of our reliability estiThis finding is consistent with the obmates, represent the only data for servations of other researchers who which are can estimate the reliability had subjects exercise maximally. of measurement in the study of Other observations have indicated exercise:-inducedmuscle soreness. that subjects produce greater levels of torque during maximal eccentric isokSeveral inve~tigators~4.~J concluded inetic contractions than during maxithat exercises primarily requiring the mal concentric isokinetic contractions Uanet Kues, MS, PT, personal commuuse of eccentric muscle contractions produce greater muscle soreness than nication). Muscle soreness is probably greater after maximal isokinetic ecdo exercises that require mostly concentric contractions because the rnuscentric muscle contractions. A variety cle must resist greater levels of torque of exercise methods were used in during these contractions than during these studies. Asmussen2 and Newmaximal concentric contractions. ham et al3 used a platform-stepping exercise method. Talag4 and Clarkson et a16 used an isotonic exercise Physical Therapy /Volume 71, Number 7 /July 1991 Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ptj/article-abstract/71/7/505/2728793 by East Carolina University user on 07 April 2018
The velocity of limb movement in this study was constant at 30°/s. This velocity was selected because our preliminary studies indicated that muscle soreness could not be induced when higher constant velocities of movement were used (eg, 60" and 90°/s). The results of experiment 2 may not apply to isokinetic exercise at higher limb velocities. Further research is needed to examine this issue. The results of our study appear to indicate that the intensity of muscle contraction, rather than the type of contraction, is the dependent factor in producing exercise-induced muscle soreness. This finding would imply that individuals could perform concentric and eccentric isokinetic contractions without experiencing muscle soreness if the intensity of exercise were controlled and consisted of less than maximal effort.
l h e r e appears to be no difference in the degree of exercise-induced muscle soreness between subjects who perform concentric isokinetic contractions and those who perform eccentric isokinetic contractions of their quadriceps femoris muscles at equal levels of power. The change in exercise-induced muscle soreness is greater 24 hours after exercise for subjects who perform eccentric isokinetic contractions than for those who perform concentric isokinetic contractions of their quadriceps femoris muscles at maximal effort. This observation is probably explained by the greater torque production that occurs during eccentric isokinetic contractions than during concentric isokinetic contractions performed with maximal effort. Acknowledgments
We would like to thank Sheryl Finucane, PT, and Janet Kues, MS, PT, for their comments and assistance in the development of our experimental procedures. We would also like to thank Phil McClure, MS, PT, Neal Pratt, PhD, PT,and Mary Watkins, MS, PT, for their editorial assistance. 512 /23
4 Talag TS. Residual muscle soreness as influenced by concentric, eccentric, and static contractions. Research Quarterly. 1973;44:459469. 5 Friden J, Sjostrom M, Ekblom B. A morphological study of delayed muscle soreness. Experientia. 1981;37:506507. 6 Clarkson PM, Byrnes WC, McCormick KM,et al. Muscle soreness and serum creatine kinase activity following isometric, eccentric and concentric exercise. Int J Sports Med 1986; 7:152-155. 7 Schwane JA, Johnson SR, Vandenakker CB, Armstrong RB. Delayed onset muscle soreness and plasma CPK and LDH activities after downhill running. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1983;15:5156.
References 1 Armstrong RB. Mechanisms of exerciseinduced delayed onset muscular soreness: a brief review. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1984; 15:529-538. 2 Asmussen E: Observations on experimental muscle soreness. Acta Rheum S c a d 1956; 2:10'+116. 3 Newham DJ, Mills KR, Quigley BM, Edwards RHT. Pain and fatigue after concentric and eccentric muscle contractions. Clin Sci. 1983;64:55-62.
8 Bigland-Ritchie B, Woods JJ. Integrated electromyogram and oxygen uptake during positive and negative work. J Physiol (Lond). 1976;260:267-277. 9 Price DD, McGrath PA, Rafii A, Buckingham B. The validation of visual analogue scales as ratio scale measures for chronic and experimental pain. Pain. 1983;17:45-56. 10 Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psycho1 Bull. 1979;86:420428. 11 Linton M, Gallo PS. The Practical Statistician: SimplrJied Elandbook of Statistics. Monterey, Calif: Brooks/Cole Publishing Co; 1975.
One of the easiest ways to keep current in physical therapy. is now even more mafiordable,too!
More and more, you may be encountering patients with neurological complicationsin addition to their primary dqposk. BprcS in ~mrology provides information you need -as a non-neurologicalspecialist-on clinical issues of aging,AIDS, stroke, spinal cord injuries, and more. Each In Touch home-study lesson offers you these convenient features: Case studies give you real-life applications Sent to you once a month for 12 months Study questions (and answers) help recall key points Reviews basic concepts and recent developments in a single topic area Bibliography provides references for further study *MAmembers, $99 (regularly $175);nonmembers, $135 (regularly $245).
Toplcs In Ueurology
I [email protected]
Mailing lnfo~'mati0n-Please print
Subtotal! V i i a residents add 4 In% Sales Tax
u I I
Daytime Phone #
lcorsrse Director: SusanJ, Hmdncaw, PPBD, PT cm#eNon of a w~-tu&&Istered test,yoafIl &ve&in APTAs#[email protected]
~~te reprsssnPkog2.4 ConsfCnukrg l3i&KUHonr mits US).
to 5 PM, Monday - Friday. Have your credit card information and APTA membership number ready.
Fax your order
Mail your order
0 Mastercard 0 Via Exp. Date zip
Management of the Trunk in Adult Hemiplegia Behavioral Management of the Neurologically Invohred Patient EMG for Motor Assessment Management of Peripheral Nerve Injury Legal Issues Parkinson's Disease Traumatic Head Injury Management
1-703-684-7343(toll call) 24 hours a day. Provideyour creditcardmformation, daytime phone number, and membership number.
Method of Payment American Physical Therapy Association
Call toll free
0 Check enclosed payable to
SeIected iopics include:
Credit Card # Signature OA171
Return this order formwith yourpayment to: American Physical Therapy Association, 1111 N. Fairfax St.,Alexandria, VA 22314-1488.
Physical Therapy /Volume 71, Number 71July 1991 Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ptj/article-abstract/71/7/505/2728793 by East Carolina University user on 07 April 2018