Background and Introduction: Neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) is predicated on eliciting muscle contractions and increasing muscle demand to promote increase in strength. Previous studies have shown differences in the magnitude of elicited force among various NMES waveforms but less is known about metabolic demand of muscle during NMES.Objective/Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare elicited force and muscle metabolic demand during electrically elicited contractions using different NMES waveforms.Methods: A single-session repeated measures design was used. Electrically elicited force (EEF), microvascular oxygenation (SmO2), total hemoglobin concentration ([THC]) of the vastus lateralis, and subject tolerance (VAS score) were measured using three NMES waveforms; burst modulated alternating current (Russian), biphasic pulsed current (VMS®), and burst modulated biphasic pulsed current (VMS-burst®).Results: A significant main effect for waveform was noted for EEF (F = 12.693, p < .001), SmO2 (F = 8.340, p = .001), and VAS (F = 4.213, p = .025), but not [THC]. Compared to Russian current, VMS-burst and VMS resulted in significantly greater EEF (p = .001; p = .009) and local metabolic demand (i.e. decreased SmO2) (p = .005; p = .003), but not [THC]. VAS was significantly greater (p = .023) for VMS (4.2) compared to Russian (3.07) but not different between VMS-burst and Russian and VMS-burst and VMS.Conclusion: Greater muscle force and local metabolic demand were observed with VMS-burst and VMS compared to Russian current. These data provide novel evidence to guide clinical decision making when selecting an NMES waveform.
Keywords: Muscle; Russian; infrared; spectroscopy; stimulation.