ABSTRACT
The specific tension index (STI) estimates the ratio of maximum torque (TQ) to muscle volume (MV) for a specific task and includes muscle thickness as a parameter, which can be directly evaluated by ultrasound. The objective of the present study was to compare TQ, MV and STI of the elbow flexors between strength-trained and untrained subjects. Forty men, including 11 subjects strength trained for at least two years [trained group (TG): 23.5 ± 3.1 years; 182.1 ± 4.9 cm; 88.1 ± 8.4 kg] and 29 untrained subjects [untrained group (UG): 29.8 ± 1.6 years; 172.4 ± 6.6 cm; 76.4 ± 8.1 kg], participated in the study. The STI of the elbow flexors, expressed as the TQ/MV ratio, was calculated for both groups. Muscle thickness measured by ultrasound was used to estimate MV. TQ of the elbow flexors was estimated using maximum isometric voluntary contractions. The Mann-Whitney test was used to determine possible differences in TQ, STI and MV between groups. MV and TQ were significantly higher in TG (526.07 ± 86.13 cm3; 112.04 ± 24.18 Nm) than UG (385.40 ± 80.89 cm3; 88.46 ± 13.77 Nm). There was no significant difference in the STI between TG (0.213 ± 0.03 Nm.cm3-) and UG (0.233 ± 0.02 Nm.cm3-). Although stronger, trained subjects presented elbow flexor STI values similar to those of the untrained group, a finding suggesting the maintenance of the linearity of the force-volume ratio. TQ and MV estimates were found to be reliable parameters for the distinction between groups. The STI may contribute to a more applied analysis in clinical practice and in the prescription of physical activity as an indicator of inadequate levels of overload and of the risk of injury.
The specific tension index (STI) estimates the ratio of maximum torque (TQ) to muscle volume (MV) for a specific task and includes muscle thickness as a parameter, which can be directly evaluated by ultrasound. The objective of the present study was to compare TQ, MV and STI of the elbow flexors between strength-trained and untrained subjects. Forty men, including 11 subjects strength trained for at least two years [trained group (TG): 23.5 ± 3.1 years; 182.1 ± 4.9 cm; 88.1 ± 8.4 kg] and 29 untrained subjects [untrained group (UG): 29.8 ± 1.6 years; 172.4 ± 6.6 cm; 76.4 ± 8.1 kg], participated in the study. The STI of the elbow flexors, expressed as the TQ/MV ratio, was calculated for both groups. Muscle thickness measured by ultrasound was used to estimate MV. TQ of the elbow flexors was estimated using maximum isometric voluntary contractions. The Mann-Whitney test was used to determine possible differences in TQ, STI and MV between groups. MV and TQ were significantly higher in TG (526.07 ± 86.13 cm3; 112.04 ± 24.18 Nm) than UG (385.40 ± 80.89 cm3; 88.46 ± 13.77 Nm). There was no significant difference in the STI between TG (0.213 ± 0.03 Nm.cm3-) and UG (0.233 ± 0.02 Nm.cm3-). Although stronger, trained subjects presented elbow flexor STI values similar to those of the untrained group, a finding suggesting the maintenance of the linearity of the force-volume ratio. TQ and MV estimates were found to be reliable parameters for the distinction between groups. The STI may contribute to a more applied analysis in clinical practice and in the prescription of physical activity as an indicator of inadequate levels of overload and of the risk of injury.