Acute Effects of Whole-Body Electrostimulation Combined with Stretching on Lower Back Pain.

Data from recent studies suggest that whole-body electromyostimulation (WB-EMS) is a time-effective and tailored intervention for chronic lower back pain (CLBP). The aim of this non-randomized controlled study was to compare the efficacy of a WB-EMS training and the association between WB-EMS specific training with passive stretching (Well Back System, [WBS]) on CLBP. Forty patients with CLBP, 43-81 years old, were assigned to one of the two groups: WB-EMS (n=20) and WB-EMS+WBS (n=20). Both groups completed 12 sessions (8 weeks) of the WB-EMS protocol (2×20 minutes/week). The second group performed core-specific exercises with WB-EMS plus 6 extra stretching sessions (30 minutes each). Primary study endpoints were based on changes on the visual analogue scale (VAS) and changes on the Oswestry Low Back Disability Questionnaire (ODI). Secondary study endpoints were percentage changes of maximum trunk flexion (Sit & Reach, [SR]) and changes in consumption of painkillers. Both interventions significantly improved VAS, ODI, and SR values (p range: 0.04;<0.001). However, the change of VAS (-46% vs. -17%, p<0.001), ODI (-53% vs. -17%, p<0.001), and SR (+ 7 vs.+3 cm, p=0.001) were significantly higher in the WB-EMS+WBS group compared to the WB-EMS group. The working method with WB-EMS+WBS can be a joint-friendly, individualized form to decrease CLBP.

Whole-body Electromyostimulation plus Caloric Restriction in Metabolic Syndrome.

We investigated early effects of Whole-Body Electromyostimulation added to hypocaloric diet on metabolic syndrome features in sedentary middle-aged individuals. We randomly assigned 25 patients to Whole-Body Electromyostimulation plus caloric restriction or caloric restriction alone for 26 weeks. Anthropometrics, blood pressure, fasting glucose and insulin, HOMA-IR, glycated hemoglobin, lipids, uric acid, creatinphosphokynase, C-reactive protein were assessed. Body composition was evaluated with direct-segmental, multi-frequency Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis. Both groups lost approximately 10% of weight, with similar effects on waist circumference and fat mass. Change in free-fat mass was significantly different between groups (caloric restriction -1.5±0.2 vs. Whole-Body Electromyostimulation plus caloric restriction +1.1±0.4 kg, p=0.03). Whole-Body Electromyostimulation plus caloric restriction group experienced greater percent reductions in insulin (-45.5±4.4 vs. -28.2±3.6%, p=0.002), HOMA-IR (-51.3±3.2 vs. -25.1±1.8%, p=0.001), triglycerides (-22.5±2.9 vs. -4.1±1.6%, p=0.004) and triglycerides/HDL (p=0.028). Subjects trained with Whole-Body Electromyostimulation had also significant improvement in systolic pressure (138±4 vs. 126±7 mmHg, p=0.038). No discontinuations for adverse events occurred. In middle-aged sedentary subjects with the metabolic syndrome, Whole-Body Electromyostimulation with caloric restriction for 26 weeks can improve insulin-resistance and lipid profile compared to diet alone. Further studies are needed to ascertain long-term efficacy and feasibility of this approach in individuals with the metabolic syndrome.

Effects of Two Modalities of Whole-body Electrostimulation Programs and Resistance Circuit Training on Strength and Power.

The main purpose of this study was to compare the effects on strength and muscle power of a training program based on two different modalities of whole-body electrostimulation (WB-EMS) with respect to a resistance-training program aimed at improving dynamic strength. Twenty-two subjects participated in this study: Thirteen male (age 25.2±2.8 years; height 1.78±0.1 m; body mass 72.8±6.4 kg; body fat 11.6±2.3%) and nine female (age 28.2±3.5 years; height 1.63±0.05 m; body mass 56.8±7.6 kg; body fat 19.1±4.7%). Participants were randomly assigned to three groups that underwent three different 6-week training programs: two modalities of WB-EMS, based on different electrical parameters (experimental), and circuit training with overloads (control). Force-velocity curves were calculated for each participant before and after treatment. All groups improved their level of strength and muscle power (paired sample t-Test, p<0.01; d>1) with a similar magnitude. No significant differences were observed between groups (two-way 2×3 Anova, p>0.05) at the end of the experimentation. This study suggests that WB-EMS might be considered as a valid and faster alternative - or an important complementary procedure - to a traditional overload-based resistance-training program for the development of the DS.