Exercise Therapy, Weight Lifting
Conditions
Keywords
Strength training, Mirror visual feedback
Brief summary
Cross-education describes the transfer of motor performance to the opposite limb following unilateral training and is primarily explained by adaptations within the brain. The mirror training hypothesis suggests that illusionary mirror visual feedback may augment the cross-education of strength to the untrained, contralateral limb. The purpose of this project is to examine how the use of illusionary mirror visual feedback shapes the neuromuscular adaptations that occur for both limbs during unilateral (single-limb) strength training. Our hypothesis is that mirror training will augment the level of cross-education for the untrained arm.
Detailed description
Recent empirical evidence shows a heightened level of strength transfer with the use of illusionary mirror visual feedback, but this was shown for the small muscles of the wrist during isokinetic training. It is unknown if larger, multi-joint muscles respond favorably to mirror training in practical settings. A randomized controlled study design will allocate approximately 20 participants into two groups. One group will perform unilateral strength training with illusionary mirror visual feedback (Mirror) and the other will perform the same unilateral strength training but without a mirror (No-Mirror). The intervention will involve four weeks of unilateral strength training performed twice weekly at high intensities (\>80%1RM).
Interventions
Unilateral resistance training of the elbow flexors
OTHERIllusionary mirror visual feedback
Modified Ramachandran's mirror box
Sponsors
Texas Christian University
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
BASIC_SCIENCE
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)
Intervention model description
Randomized, two arm parallel experimental and control groups
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 35 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* right-hand dominance * no previous strength training of upper body last 3 months * no injuries or recent surgeries of the upper limbs * willingness to adhere to the strength training requirements of the study
Exclusion criteria
* current use of hormone replacement therapy * pregnancy/breastfeeding
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Change in dynamic muscle strength for the trained and untrained arm | Baseline (week 0) post-training (week 5) | Dynamic 1-repetition maximum (lbs) |
| Change in isometric muscle strength for the trained and untrained arm | Baseline (week 0) post-training (week 5) | Isometric maximal voluntary contraction |
| Change in lean mass for the trained and untrained arm | Baseline (week 0), mid-training (week 2), post-training (week 5) | DEXA (g) |
| Change in muscle thickness for the trained and untrained arm | Baseline (week 0), mid-training (week 2), post-training (week 5) | Ultrasound muscle thickness (cm) |
| Change in muscle activation for the trained and untrained arm | Baseline (week 0) post-training (week 5) | Electromyographic amplitude (volts) |
Countries
United States
Outcome results
None listed