European Journal of Applied Physiology

, Volume 100, Issue 1, pp 35–44 | Cite as

Mechanomyographic assessment of contractile properties within seven segments of the human deltoid muscle

Original Article
First Online:
Accepted:

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine, by a non-invasive whole muscle mechanomyographic technique (wMMG), how muscle segment contractile properties varied within the segments of the multifunctional deltoid muscle, and how such variations in contractile properties may reflect the muscle segment’s function and fibre type composition. We hypothesised that muscle segment contractile properties, consistent with slower twitch muscle fibre populations, would be associated with the deltoid’s prime mover abductor muscle segment (middle head), rather than the prime mover flexor and extensor muscle segments (anterior and posterior heads). Eighteen healthy and athletic University students (nine males and nine females; mean age 20–24 years) volunteered for this study. Each subject’s right upper limb was secured with the forearm flexed to 30° and the shoulder in 45° of abduction. The wMMG laser sensor was positioned perpendicular to the middle of each muscle segment, to record the involuntary lateral displacement of the muscle belly following a maximal, single twitch, percutaneous neuromuscular stimulation (PNS) [180 V (max.); 80 mA (max.); 50 μs]. Ten trials were recorded from each of the seven deltoid segments for a total of 70 trials per subject. From each segment, eight variables were analysed from the recorded wMMG waveforms; maximal displacement (D max); delay time (T d); contraction time (T c); sustain time (T s); relaxation time (T r) and half relaxation time (½T r), average rate of contraction (ARC) and the average rate of relaxation (ARR). The results indicated that the contractile properties of the seven segments of the deltoid muscle showed significant (P < 0.05) variation in a medial to lateral direction. Medially the strap-like segments of the anterior (S1, S2) and posterior heads (S4–S7), with larger moment arms for shoulder flexion and extension respectively, had the fastest contractile properties. In contrast the multipennate segment 3, with the largest moment arm for shoulder abduction, had the slowest contractile properties (P < 0.05). Muscle segment contractile properties were matched to the biomechanical and architectural characteristics of the individual muscle segments.

Keywords

Mechanomyography Deltoid Contractile properties Functional differentiation Muscle physiology 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank Mr. Darryl McAndrew and the UoW students of BMS303 for assistance during the collection of the data, Mr Mario Solitro for technical assistance, Mrs. Bevin Arnason and Mr. Benjamin Musker for assistance with the illustrations, and the University of Wollongong for a Doctoral scholarship to MG and a study leave assistance grant to MB.

References

  1. Armstrong RB, Phelps RO (1984) Muscle fibre type composition of the hind limb. Am J Anat 3:259–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brown JMM, Solomon C, Paton ME (1993) Further evidence of functional differentiation with in biceps brachii. Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol 12:301–309Google Scholar
  3. Buller AJ, Dornhorst AC, Edwards R, Kerr D, Whelan RF (1959) Fast and slow muscles in mammals. Nature 4674:1516–1517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dahmane R, Valen i V, Knez N, Er I (2001) Evaluation of the ability to make non-invasive estimation of muscle contractile properties on the basis of the muscle belly response. Med Biol Eng Comput 1:51–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dahmane R, Djordjevic S, Simunic B, Valencic V (2005) Spatial fibre type distribution in normal human muscle: histochemical and tensiomyographical evaluation. J Biomech 38:2451–2459PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Djordjevic S, Valencic V, Knez N, Erzen I (2001) The comparison of dynamic characteristics of skeletal muscles in two groups of sportsmen—sprinters and cyclists. Biomed Eng 15:1–4Google Scholar
  7. English AW, Weeks OI, Segal RL (1993) Compartmentalization of muscles and their motor nuclei: the partitioning hypothesis. Phys Ther 12:857–867Google Scholar
  8. Ettema GJC, Styles G, Kippers V (1998) The moment arms of 23 muscle segments of the upper limb with varying elbow and forearm positions for motor control. Hum Mov Sci 2:201–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fayet G, Rouche A, Hogrel JY, Tome FM, Fardeau M (2001) Age-related morphological changes of the deltoid muscle from 50 to 79 years of age. Acta Neuropathol 4:358–366Google Scholar
  10. Fick R (1911) Handbuch der Anatomie und Mechanik der Gelenke:Bardeleben’s Handbuch der Anatomie (vol 2). Jena G Fisher, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  11. Friden J, Lieber RL (2001) Eccentric exercise-induced injuries to contractile and cytoskeletal muscle fibre components. Acta Physiol Scand 3:321–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gray H, Standring S (2005) Gray’s anatomy: the anatomical basis of clinical practice, 39th edn. Elsevier, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. Hill AV (1938) The heat of shortening and dynamic constants of muscle. Proc R Soc 136:136–195Google Scholar
  14. Holzbaur KR, Murray WM, Delp SL (2005) A model of the upper extremity for simulating musculoskeletal surgery and analyzing neuromuscular control. Ann Biomed Eng 6:829–840CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Johnson MA, Polgar J, Weightman D, Appleton D (1973) Data on the distribution of fibre types in thirty-six human muscles—an autopsy study. J Neurophysiol 1:111–129Google Scholar
  16. Johnson GO, Bogduk N, Nowitzke A, House D (1994) Anatomy and actions of the trapezius muscle. Clin Biomech 1:44–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jones D, Round J, de Hann A (2004) Skeletal muscle from molecules to movement. Churchill Livingstone, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  18. Levangie PK, Norkin CC (2001) Joint structure and function a comprehensive analysis. F.A. Davis, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  19. Lieber RL (2002) Skeletal muscle structure, function and plasticity-the physiological basis of rehabilitation. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  20. Lieber RL, Friden J (2000) Functional and clinical significance of skeletal muscle architecture. Muscle Nerve 11:1647–1666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lieber RL, Friden J (2001) Clinical significance of skeletal muscle architecture. Clin Orthop Relat Res 383:140–151PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Loeb GE (1985) Motoneurone task groups: coping with kinematic heterogeneity. J Exp Biol 115:137–146PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Lorne E, Gagey O, Quillard J, Hue E, Gagey N (2001) The fibrous frame of the deltoid muscle: its functional and surgical relevance. Clin Orthop Relat Res 386:222–225PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mannion AF (1999) Fibre type characteristics and function of the human paraspinal muscles: normal values and changes in association with low back pain. J Electomyogr Kinesiol 6:363–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Manueddu C, Blanc Y, Taillard W (1989) Study of the functioning of the muscles gluteus medius and maximus-an electrokinesiographic analysis. Ann Kinesither 5:193–201Google Scholar
  26. Martini FH, Timmons MJ (1997) Human anatomy. Prentice Hall, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  27. McComas AJ (1996) Skeletal muscle: form and function. H. Kinetics, ChapaignGoogle Scholar
  28. McComas AJ, Thomas HC (1968) Fast and slow twitch muscles in man. J Neurol Sci 2:301–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ng JK, Richardson CA, Kippers V, Parnianpour M (1998) Relationship between muscle fiber composition and functional capacity of back muscles in healthy subjects and patients with back pain. J Orthop Sport Phys 6:389–402Google Scholar
  30. Orizio C, Baratta RV, Zhou BH, Solomonow M, Veicsteinas A (2000) Force and surface mechanomyogram frequency responses in cat gastrocnemius. J Biomech 4:427–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Orizio C, Gobbo M, Veicsteinas A, Baratta RV, Zhou BH, Solomonow M (2003) Transients of the force and surface mechanomyogram during cat gastrocnemius tetanic stimulation. Eur J Appl Physiol 6:601–606Google Scholar
  32. Pare E, Stern JT, Schwartz JM, Brook S (1981) Functional differentiation within the Tensor Fascia Latae. J Bone Joint Surg 9:1457–1471Google Scholar
  33. Paton ME, Brown JMM (1994) An electromyographic analysis of functional differentiation in human pectoralis major muscle. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 3:161–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Paton ME, Brown JMM (1995) Functional differentiation within latissimus dorsi. Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol 5:301–309Google Scholar
  35. Singh K, Melis E, Richmond F, Scott S (2002) Morphometry of Macaca mulatta forelimb. II. Fibre-type composition in shoulder and elbow muscles. J Morphol 3:323–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Soderberg GL, Dostal WF (1978) Electromyographic study of three parts of the gluteus medius muscle during functional activities. Phys Ther 6:691–696Google Scholar
  37. Valencic V, Knez N (1997) Measuring of skeletal muscle’s dynamic properties. Artif Organs 3:240–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Valencic V, Djodjevic S, Jurcic-Zlobec B (2001a) The comparison of dynamic characteristics of skeletal muscles in two groups of sportsmen-sprinters and cyclists. Biomed Eng 3:1–4Google Scholar
  39. Valencic V, Knez N, Simunic B (2001b) Tensiomyography: detection of skeletal muscle response by means of radial muscle displacement. Biomed Eng 1:1–10Google Scholar
  40. Wickham J, Brown JMM (1998) Muscles within muscles: the neuromotor control of intra-muscular segments. Eur J Appl Physiol 3:219–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Wickham JB, Brown JM, Green R, McAndrew JM (2004a) Muscles within muscles: the classical triphasic EMG burst and its applicability to segments of large radiate agonist/antagonist muscles. J Musculoskelet Res 2:107–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wickham JB, Brown JM, McAndrew JM (2004b) Muscles within muscles: anatomical and functional segmentation of selected shoulder joint musculature. J Musculoskelet Res 1:57–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Yoshitake Y, Ue H, Miyazaki M, Moritani T (2001) Assessment of lower-back muscle fatigue using electromyography, mechanomyography, and near-infrared spectroscopy. Eur J Appl Physiol 3:174–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Human Performance Laboratories, School of Health ScienceUniversity of Wollongong WollongongAustralia
  2. 2.Schulthess ClinicZürichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations