Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10316/106177
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorBarcala-Furelos, Roberto-
dc.contributor.authorGonzález-Represas, Alicia-
dc.contributor.authorRey, Ezequiel-
dc.contributor.authorMartínez-Rodríguez, Alicia-
dc.contributor.authorKalén, Anton-
dc.contributor.authorMarques, Olga-
dc.contributor.authorRama, Luís-
dc.date.accessioned2023-03-23T11:37:34Z-
dc.date.available2023-03-23T11:37:34Z-
dc.date.issued2020-08-12-
dc.identifier.issn1660-4601-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10316/106177-
dc.description.abstractThis study aimed to evaluate the degree to which transcutaneous electrical stimulation (ES) enhanced recovery following a simulated water rescue. Twenty-six lifeguards participated in this study. The rescue consisted of swimming 100 m with fins and rescue-tube: 50 m swim approach and 50 m tow-in a simulated victim. Blood lactate clearance, rated perceived effort (RPE), and muscle contractile properties were evaluated at baseline, after the water rescue, and after ES or passive-recovery control condition (PR) protocol. Tensiomiography, RPE, and blood lactate basal levels indicated equivalence between both groups. There was no change in tensiomiography from pre to post-recovery and no difference between recovery protocols. Overall-RPE, legs-RPE and arms-RPE after ES (mean ± SD; 2.7 ± 1.53, 2.65 ± 1.66, and 2.30 ± 1.84, respectively) were moderately lower than after PR (3.57 ± 2.4, 3.71 ± 2.43, and 3.29 ± 1.79, respectively) (p = 0.016, p = 0.010, p = 0.028, respectively). There was a significantly lower blood lactate level after recovery in ES than in PR (mean ± SD; 4.77 ± 1.86 mmol·L-1 vs. 6.27 ± 3.69 mmol·L-1; p = 0.045). Low-frequency ES immediately after a water rescue is an effective recovery strategy to clear out blood lactate concentration.pt
dc.language.isoengpt
dc.publisherMDPIpt
dc.rightsopenAccesspt
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/pt
dc.subjecttranscutaneous electric nerve stimulationpt
dc.subjecttask performance and analysispt
dc.subjecttensiomyographypt
dc.subjectlactatept
dc.subjectlifesavingpt
dc.titleIs Low-Frequency Electrical Stimulation a Tool for Recovery after a Water Rescue? A Cross-Over Study with Lifeguardspt
dc.typearticlept
degois.publication.firstPage5854pt
degois.publication.issue16pt
degois.publication.titleInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Healthpt
dc.peerreviewedyespt
dc.identifier.doi10.3390/ijerph17165854-
degois.publication.volume17pt
dc.date.embargo2020-08-12*
dc.identifier.pmid32806727-
uc.date.periodoEmbargo0pt
dc.identifier.eissn1660-4601-
item.grantfulltextopen-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.languageiso639-1en-
item.openairetypearticle-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
item.fulltextCom Texto completo-
crisitem.author.researchunitCIDAF - Research Unit for Sport and Physical Activity-
crisitem.author.orcid0000-0002-7389-416X-
crisitem.author.orcid0000-0002-9619-8618-
Appears in Collections:I&D CIDAF - Artigos em Revistas Internacionais
FCDEF - Artigos em Revistas Internacionais
Show simple item record

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

6
checked on May 6, 2024

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

5
checked on May 2, 2024

Page view(s)

59
checked on May 7, 2024

Download(s)

17
checked on May 7, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric

Altmetric


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons