| Author |
Participants
|
Vibration
Method (type)
|
Exercise
Type
|
Frequency
(Hz)
|
Amplitude
(mm)
|
Duration
|
Results |
Abercromby
et
al., 2007a |
16 H
(9♂, 7 ♀)
|
VV, SV
VV, SV
|
DS
SS
|
3030
|
44
|
30 s30 s
|
EMG
activity of the leg extensors were significantly greater during
SV than VV. Proximal leg muscles were activated more than distal
muscles. |
Mischi
and
Cardinale, 2009 |
12 H
(5♂ , 7♀)
|
Custom built isometric
elbow device
|
Isometric
(20%, 40%, 60%, 80%, 100% max force)
|
28
|
NR
|
15 s
|
Vibration significantly increased
coactivation during elbow extension for
lower loads (20% & 40% max effort) but no differences in coactivation
were reported during elbow flexion. |
|
|
|
Isometric
(20%, 40%,
60%, 80%,
100% max
force)
|
0
|
NR
|
15s
|
|
Rothmuller
and
Cafarelli, 1995 |
10 H ♂
|
Direct
vibration
|
Isometric
Knee
extension
|
1500
|
1.5
|
15 s
|
Vibration of the agonist increased
antagonist coactivity but it did not change the rate at which coactivation increased during fatigue. During vibration
bicep femoris coactivation
was greater during vibration. but it did not change during fatigue
with or without vibration |
H = Healthy; SV= Side alternating vibration; VV = Vertical vibration; NR
= Not reported
|