Sign up Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
fitbyfred

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 168
 #1 
Hi, is there clear information that points us to the best placement of NIRS during both treadmill walking and running assessments ? I've bounced placement around test-test, workout to workout, but would enjoy learning from anyone who is aware if consensus exists on ideal location(s). I have read through the abstracts RE: placement of NIRS during cycling and arm cranking, but don't know if I have seen specific info RE: placement during walking & running assessments.  
Juerg Feldmann

Fortiori Design LLC
Registered:
Posts: 1,530
 #2 
Here  some suggestions  and  some additional info .
 First.  Fro cycling and running the vastus  lateralis  seems  to give    nice information's.
  We use the   connecting line between SIAS  to the lateral  fibula head  and than  go into the middle  so we have    a  great   way to get the same place.
  I tried  glut  max  as well as hamstrings  but the most  or biggest  amplitude  seems from the vastus lateralis.
  I tried  as well calf  muscles  but  in running if you have  a heel stricker    not optimal info  and  as  the  speed changes many change the   style  form   heel  to at least mid foot  but on a treadmill often to  fore foot. So as well not  bad  info  for vastus lateralis  for walking and  running . I can show later some   tests  we did  to try this out.
 I always take a    see though  plastic  rap  and a  2 m  cover stretch roll piece. It takes  15 seconds  to mount  and never    had a  problem.

The relationship between muscle deoxygenation and activation in different muscles of the quadriceps during cycle ramp exercise

Lisa M. K. Chin,1,2 John M. Kowalchuk,3 Thomas J. Barstow,4 Narihiko Kondo,5 Tatsuro Amano,5 Tomoyuki Shiojiri,6 and Shunsaku Koga1

1Applied Physiology Laboratory, Kobe Design University, Kobe, Japan;

2Rehabilitation Medicine Department, Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland;

3School of Kinesiology and Department of Physiology and Pharmacology, The University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada;

4Department of Kinesiology, Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas;

5Faculty of Human Development, University of Kobe, Kobe, Japan; and

6Laboratory of Exercise and Sports Science, Yokohama City University, Yokohama, Japan

Corresponding author.

Address for reprint requests and other correspondence: S. Koga, Applied Physiology Laboratory, Kobe Design Univ., 8-1-1 Gakuennishi-machi, Nishi-ku, Kobe 651-2196, Japan (e-mail: s-koga@kobe-du.ac.jp ).

Author information ►Article notes ►Copyright and License information ►

Received October 15, 2010; Accepted July 25, 2011.

Copyright notice

This article has been cited by other articles in PMC.

Go to:

Abstract

The relationship between muscle deoxygenation and activation was examined in three different muscles of the quadriceps during cycling ramp exercise. Seven young male adults (24 ± 3 yr; mean ± SD) pedaled at 60 rpm to exhaustion, with a work rate (WR) increase of 20 W/min. Pulmonary oxygen uptake was measured breath-by-breath, while muscle deoxygenation (HHb) and activity were measured by time-resolved near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) and surface electromyography (EMG), respectively, at the vastus lateralis (VL), rectus femoris (RF), and vastus medialis (VM). Muscle deoxygenation was corrected for adipose tissue thickness and normalized to the amplitude of the HHb response, while EMG signals were integrated (iEMG) and normalized to the maximum iEMG determined from maximal voluntary contractions. Muscle deoxygenation and activation were then plotted as a percentage of maximal work rate (%WRmax). The HHb response for all three muscle groups was fitted by a sigmoid function, which was determined as the best fitting model. The c/d parameter for the sigmoid fit (representing the %WRmax at 50% of the total amplitude of the HHb response) was similar between VL (47 ± 12% WRmax) and VM (43 ± 11% WRmax), yet greater (P < 0.05) for RF (65 ± 13% WRmax), demonstrating a “right shift” of the HHb response compared with VL and VM. The iEMG also showed that muscle activation of the RF muscle was lower (P < 0.05) compared with VL and VM throughout the majority of the ramp exercise, which may explain the different HHb response in RF. Therefore, these data suggest that the sigmoid function can be used to model the HHb response in different muscles of the quadriceps; however, simultaneous measures of muscle activation are also needed for the HHb response to be properly interpreted during cycle ramp exercise.

fitbyfred

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 168
 #3 
Thanks, Jeurg.
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.

HTML hit counter - Quick-counter.net