Isokinetic eccentric training is more effective than constant load eccentric training for quadriceps rehabilitation following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a randomized controlled trial.

Objective: To compare the effects of conventional (constant load) eccentric training and isokinetic eccentric training on quadriceps muscle mass, strength and functional performance in recreational athletes following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.

Methods: Thirty recreational male athletes (25 years old) undergoing ACL reconstruction received a standard rehabilitation program. Volunteers were randomized to conventional group (CG; n = 15) or isokinetic group (IG; n = 15) to be engaged in a 6-week (2 sessions/week) quadriceps eccentric training program at the extensor chair or at the isokinetic dynamometer, respectively.

Isokinetic eccentric training is more effective than constant load eccentric training on the quadriceps rehabilitation following partial meniscectomy: A randomized clinical trial.

Objectives: To compare the effects of conventional (constant load) eccentric training and isokinetic eccentric training on quadriceps muscle mass, strength and functionality of recreational athletes following partial meniscectomy.

Design: Randomized controlled trial.

Setting: XXXX, Brazil.

Cardiorespiratory fitness and muscular strength of deaf futsal players.

The present study compared the cardiopulmonary exercise capacity and peak torque of the knee extensor and flexor muscles in team players associated with the Gaucho Deaf Futsal Federation players to those of their hearing peers. In this cross-sectional study, 16 male athletes, eight futsal players with hearing impairment (deaf group, DG; 22.6±7.

Effects of low frequency functional electrical stimulation with 15 and 50 Hz on muscle strength in heart failure patients.

Purpose: To compare the acute effects of functional electrical stimulation (FES) with 15 and 50 Hertz (Hz) frequencies on muscle strength in patients with heart failure with healthy individuals.

Methods: Twenty-two 61.6 ± 1.