Why the study?
Does isometric neck extension elicit different sympathetic and cardiovascular responses compared to isometric handgrip in healthy subjects?
Does isometric neck extension elicit different sympathetic and cardiovascular responses compared to isometric handgrip in healthy subjects?
Isometric neck extension elicits marked increases in sympathetic nerve activity and cardiovascular responses, though peak responses are lower compared to isometric handgrip at higher intensities.
INE elicits lower peak MAP and MSNA than IHG at 30% MVC in healthy adults; leaves open differential effects during training in patients.
PURPOSE: Although the autonomic and cardiovascular responses to arm and leg exercise have been studied, the sympathetic adjustments to exercise of the neck have not. The purpose of the present study was twofold: 1) to determine sympathetic and cardiovascular responses to isometric contractions of the neck extensors and 2) to compare sympathetic and cardiovascular responses to isometric exercise of the neck and forearm. METHODS: Muscle sympathetic nerve activity (MSNA), mean arterial pressure (MAP), and heart rate were measured in nine healthy subjects while performing isometric neck extension (INE) and isometric handgrip (IHG) in the prone position. After a 3-min baseline period, subjects performed three intensities of INE for 2.5 min each: 1) unloaded (supporting head alone), 2) 10% maximal voluntary contraction (MVC), and 3) 30% MVC, then subjects performed two intensities (10% and 30% MVC) of IHG for 2.5 min. RESULTS: Supporting the head by itself did not significantly change any of the variables. During [NE, MAP significantly increased by 10 +/- 2 and 31 +/- 4 mm Hg and MSNA increased by 67 +/- 46 and 168 +/- 36 units/30 s for 10% and 30% MVC, respectively. IHG and INE evoked similar responses at 10% MVC, but IHG elicited higher peak MAP and MSNA at 30% MVC (37 +/- 7 mm Hg (P < 0.05) and 300 +/- 48 units/30 s (P < 0.01) for IHG, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The data indicate that INE can elicit marked increases in MSNA and cardiovascular responses but that it evokes lower peak responses as compared to IHG. We speculate that possible differences in muscle fiber type composition, muscle mass, and/or muscle architecture of the neck and forearm are responsible for these differences in peak responses.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Steele et al. (2000) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: