Cranial Electrical Stimulation in Fitness with Weightlifting Tools

Čupriks, Leonīds; Vimbsons, Viestards; Čuprika, Aleksandra; Rudzitis, Andris

doi:10.1515/ljss-2016-0010

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In studies examining acute stress responses in healthy participants, CES appears to reduce subjective feelings of anxiety, but these are not necessarily accompanied by any changes in endocrine responses. In two human performance-oriented studies, CES produced faster and more accurate responding on certain CPT measures (Southworth, 1999 ), and increased motor force output during a weightlifting task (Cupriks et al, 2016 ). The former outcome warrants replication and extension, whereas the latter study has considerable methodological challenges that limit interpretation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We found only one English-language study examining physical performance outcomes of CES treatment, involving 10 male weightlifters administered active CES (0.5 Hz, 10–500 μA, for 15-min) using the Alpha-Stim SCS device with bilateral earlobe electrodes (Cupriks et al, 2016 ). Before and after CES administration, muscle force output was measured during clean and press barbell lift repetitions (without the overhead phase).…”

Section: Ces For Non-clinical Applicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Critical Review of Cranial Electrotherapy Stimulation for Neuromodulation in Clinical and Non-clinical Samples

Brunyé

Patterson

Wooten

et al. 2021

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cranial electrotherapy stimulation (CES) is a neuromodulation tool used for treating several clinical disorders, including insomnia, anxiety, and depression. More recently, a limited number of studies have examined CES for altering affect, physiology, and behavior in healthy, non-clinical samples. The physiological, neurochemical, and metabolic mechanisms underlying CES effects are currently unknown. Computational modeling suggests that electrical current administered with CES at the earlobes can reach cortical and subcortical regions at very low intensities associated with subthreshold neuromodulatory effects, and studies using electroencephalography (EEG) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) show some effects on alpha band EEG activity, and modulation of the default mode network during CES administration. One theory suggests that CES modulates brain stem (e.g., medulla), limbic (e.g., thalamus, amygdala), and cortical (e.g., prefrontal cortex) regions and increases relative parasympathetic to sympathetic drive in the autonomic nervous system. There is no direct evidence supporting this theory, but one of its assumptions is that CES may induce its effects by stimulating afferent projections of the vagus nerve, which provides parasympathetic signals to the cardiorespiratory and digestive systems. In our critical review of studies using CES in clinical and non-clinical populations, we found severe methodological concerns, including potential conflicts of interest, risk of methodological and analytic biases, issues with sham credibility, lack of blinding, and a severe heterogeneity of CES parameters selected and employed across scientists, laboratories, institutions, and studies. These limitations make it difficult to derive consistent or compelling insights from the extant literature, tempering enthusiasm for CES and its potential to alter nervous system activity or behavior in meaningful or reliable ways. The lack of compelling evidence also motivates well-designed and relatively high-powered experiments to assess how CES might modulate the physiological, affective, and cognitive responses to stress. Establishing reliable empirical links between CES administration and human performance is critical for supporting its prospective use during occupational training, operations, or recovery, ensuring reliability and robustness of effects, characterizing if, when, and in whom such effects might arise, and ensuring that any benefits of CES outweigh the risks of adverse events.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Ces For Non-clinical Applicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%