Published in

Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina do Esporte, Revista Brasileira de Medicina do Esporte, 6(27), p. 568-572, 2021

DOI: 10.1590/1517-8692202127062021_0003

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Energy Expenditure in Hiit Whole Body Associated With Electromyostimulation

This paper is made freely available by the publisher.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.

Full text: Download

Question mark in circle
Preprint: policy unknown
Question mark in circle
Postprint: policy unknown
Question mark in circle
Published version: policy unknown
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

ABSTRACT Introduction: The use of whole body electromyostimulation (WB-EMS) has been shown to be an efficient method for inducing significant improvements in muscle strength and performance outcomes. Hypothetically, WB-EMS had been considered an enhancer of energy expenditure in the session, but this remains unclear. Objective: In view of the lack of information, this study aims to evaluate the energy expenditure of WB-EMS associated with whole body High-Intensity Interval Training (HIIT). Methods: Fourteen male participants were submitted into two randomized exercise sessions: HIIT (whole body weight exercises without WB-EMS) and HIIT+WB-EMS (whole body weight exercises associated with WB-EMS). For both exercise conditions, the subjects performed whole body HIIT according to the following protocol: 3 minutes of warm-up followed by 4 exercises (30 seconds of stimulus) organized in 2 blocks, with 3 sets in each exercise, a rest period of 15 seconds between sets, and 180 seconds between blocks. The following exercises were performed: jumping jacks, squat and thrusts, burpees, and spider plank. Results: Significant differences were found in the absolute VO2 (HIIT:2.18±0.34, HIIT+WB-EMS:2.32±0.36 L.min−1) and relative VO2 (HIIT:26.30±3.77, HIIT+WB-EMS:28.02± 3.74 ml.kg.min−1), MET (HIIT:7.51±1.07, HIIT+WB-EMS:8.00±1.07), lactate concentration (HIIT:11.59±2.16, HIIT+WB-EMS: 12.64±1.99 mmol.L−1) and total energy expenditure (HIIT: 249.6± 45.04 Kcal, HIIT+ WB-EMS: 268.9±40.67 Kcal; 7.46 ± 5.31%). Conclusion: Our data indicate that the use of WB-EMS associated with HIIT generated a slightly higher metabolic demand than that of the control. However, the absolute differences do not allow us to indicate the superiority of WB-EMS, and future trials should be designed to determine the long-term effects.