Abstract
p 5 0.03) and delay in grip initiation (F5 6.147, p5 0.018). Conclusion: As expected, the uninjured hands were stronger than the injured hands. The slope of the forcegenerationphasewas less steep for the injured hand, indicating a decrease in the rate of force development. This injury-induced neuromuscular maladaptation is likely due to a reduction in the number and/or size of motor units and in their capacity to fire synchronously and at their highest firing rate. An unexpected finding was the steeper slope of the forcedecay phase for the uninjured hands, which indicated that the uninjured hands fatigued faster than the injured hands. The most plausible explanation for this finding is that participants did not exert true maximal effort with their injured hand. Thus, fatigue (motor unit de-recruitment) occurred at a slower rate than in the uninjured hand which contracted maximally.We suggest that protective mechanisms prevent maximal exertion in the injured hand, even when a person intends to exert full effort. Future studies should investigate the nature of those protective mechanisms, whether they are local (neuromuscular) or psychological (due to fear of pain and/or fear of reinjury)and further explore gender differences.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call