Etiology and Recovery of Neuromuscular Fatigue following Competitive Soccer Match-Play

Abstract

Aim: Previous research into the etiology of neuromuscular fatigue following competitive soccer match-play has primarily focused on peripheral perturbations, with limited research assessing central nervous system function in the days post-match. The aim of the present study was to examine the contribution and time-course of recovery of central and peripheral factors toward neuromuscular fatigue following competitive soccer match-play.Methods: Sixteen male semi-professional soccer players completed a 90-min soccer match. Pre-, post- and at 24, 48, and 72 h participants completed a battery of neuromuscular, physical, and perceptual tests. Maximal voluntary contraction force (MVC) and twitch responses to electrical (femoral nerve) and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) of the motor cortex during isometric knee-extension and at rest were measured to assess central nervous system (voluntary activation, VA) and muscle contractile (potentiated twitch force, Qtw, pot) function. Electromyography responses of the rectus femoris to single- and paired-pulse TMS were used to assess corticospinal excitability and short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI), respectively. Fatigue and perceptions of muscle soreness were assessed via visual analog scales, and physical function was assessed through measures of jump (countermovement jump height and reactive strength index) and sprint performance.Results: Competitive match-play elicited significant post-match declines in MVC force (−14%, P < 0.001) that persisted for 48 h (−4%, P = 0.01), before recovering by 72 h post-exercise. VA (motor point stimulation) was reduced immediately post-match (−8%, P < 0.001), and remained depressed at 24 h (−5%, P = 0.01) before recovering by 48 h post-exercise. Qtw,pot was reduced post-match (−14%, P < 0.001), remained depressed at 24 h (−6%, P = 0.01), before recovering by 48 h post-exercise. No changes were evident in corticospinal excitability or SICI. Jump performance took 48 h to recover, while perceptions of fatigue persisted at 72 h.Conclusion: Competitive soccer match-play elicits substantial impairments in central nervous system and muscle function, requiring up to 48 h to resolve. The results of the study could have important implications for fixture scheduling, the optimal management of the training process, squad rotation during congested competitive schedules, and the implementation of appropriate recovery interventions.

Sex differences in fatigability and recovery relative to the intensity–duration relationship

“…Stimulator output for VA TMS was determined as the greatest mean superimposed twitch (SIT) elicited by two pulses delivered during a ß6 s contraction at 50% MVC, as TMS intensity was increased in a step-wise (i.e. 5% increments) fashion from 50% maximal stimulator output (Thomas et al 2016;Brownstein et al 2017). Each contraction was separated by 30 s rest.…”

Countermovement Jump Recovery in Professional Soccer Players Using an Inertial Sensor

“…Impairments in CMJ have been demonstrated on the days 37 following various forms of exercise including drop jump protocols, 1-3 repeated sprint and 38 simulated field sport tests [4][5][6][7][8][9] and soccer matches. [10][11] Traditionally, CMJ performance has been 39 measured using a vertical structure where athletes jump to touch incrementally separated pegs 40…”

Motor cortical and corticospinal function differ during an isometric squat compared with isometric knee extension

“…In recent years, there has been an increase in the number of studies applying transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in sport and exercise and movement sciences to assess intracortical and corticospinal activity in response to various interventions (Brownstein et al., ; Thomas, Toward, West, Howatson, & Goodall, ; Weier & Kidgell, ). Single‐pulse TMS permits the quantitative assessment of corticospinal excitability through the size of the compound electromyography (EMG) response, whereas paired‐pulse TMS separated by 2–5 and 10–15 ms can be used to examine intracortical inhibitory (termed short‐interval intracortical inhibition; SICI) and facilitatory circuits (termed intracortical facilitation; ICF), respectively (Kujirai et al., ).…”

“…Single‐pulse TMS permits the quantitative assessment of corticospinal excitability through the size of the compound electromyography (EMG) response, whereas paired‐pulse TMS separated by 2–5 and 10–15 ms can be used to examine intracortical inhibitory (termed short‐interval intracortical inhibition; SICI) and facilitatory circuits (termed intracortical facilitation; ICF), respectively (Kujirai et al., ). Single‐ and paired‐pulse TMS protocols have been used as tools to investigate responses to exercise, such as fatiguing isometric single‐limb contractions (Goodall, Howatson, & Thomas, ; Hunter, McNeil, Butler, Gandevia, & Taylor, ; Kennedy, McNeil, Gandevia, & Taylor, ) and locomotor exercise (Brownstein et al., ; Sidhu, Cresswell, & Carroll, ; Thomas, Dent, Howatson, & Goodall, ), mechanisms of locomotion (Sidhu, Cresswell, & Carroll, ) and neural adaptations to strength training (Weier & Kidgell, ).…”

“…Many studies have used TMS to assess neural responses to whole‐body, dynamic exercise, but a common feature amongst these studies is that responses were assessed in a single‐limb, isometric model (Brownstein et al., ; Weier & Kidgell, ). As such, a discrepancy exists between the neuromechanics of the intervention and the testing modality used to detect changes in intracortical and corticospinal activity in response to the interventions.…”