Efficacy of Whole-Body Electromyostimulation (WB-EMS) on Body Composition and Muscle Strength in Non-athletic Adults. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract

This systematic review and meta-analysis set out to determine the efficacy on whole-body electromyostimulation (WB-EMS) on body composition and strength parameters in non-athletic cohorts. A systematic review of the literature according to the PRISMA statement included (a) controlled trials, (b) WB-EMS trials with at least one exercise and one control group, (c) WB-EMS as primary physical intervention, (d) WB-EMS with at least six electrodes covering most muscle groups, (e) non-athletic cohorts. We searched eight electronic databases up to June 30, 2020, without language restrictions. Standardized mean differences (SMD) for muscle mass parameters, total body fat mass, maximum leg extension, and trunk extension strength were defined as outcome measures. In summary, 16 studies with 19 individual WB-EMS groups representing 897 participants were included. Studies vary considerably with respect to age, BMI, and physical conditions. Impulse protocols of the studies were roughly comparable, but training frequency (1–5 sessions/week) and intervention length (6–54 weeks) differed between the studies. SMD average was 1.23 (95%-CI: 0.71–1.76) for muscle mass, 0.98 (0.74–1.22) for maximum leg, and 1.08 (0.78–1.39) for maximum trunk extension strength changes (all p < 0.001). SMD for body fat changes (−0.40, [−0.98 to 0.17]), however, did not reach significance. I2 and Q-statistics revealed substantial heterogeneity of muscle and fat mass changes between the trials. However, rank and regression tests did not indicate positive evidence for small-study bias and funnel plot asymmetries. This work provided further evidence for significant, large-sized effects of WB-EMS on muscle mass and strength parameters, but not on body fat mass.Clinical Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov, PROSPERO; ID: CRD42020183059.

Once-Weekly Whole-Body Electromyostimulation Increases Strength, Stability and Body Composition in Amateur Golfers. A Randomized Controlled Study

“…It might be surprising, but in contrast to corresponding commercial advertising, the evidence for a positive effect of once-weekly 20-min sessions of WB-EMS is very limited in healthy adults. To the best of our knowledge [ 11 ], only three studies address this issue in people with chronic unspecific low-back pain [ 15 , 27 ] or sarcopenic obesity [ 33 ]; however, the two studies that focus on this issue show inconsistent results on strength and body composition parameters. In summary, we observed positive effects on MITS and MILES that still remained significant after adjusting for multiple testing of the (two) primary outcomes.…”

“…The sample size of the study was powered on the initially intended primary study outcome “Average golf score of five rounds on an 18-hole course” (see ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04264416), which, unfortunately, could not be addressed due to the closure of golf courses in the region. However, considering the results of current studies on the parameter addressed in [ 11 , 27 ], the statistical power should be sufficient to address the outcomes of the present study.…”

“…Whole-body electromyostimulation (WB-EMS) might be such a candidate. Indeed, recent studies (summarized in [ 11 , 12 ]) have reported favorable results of WB-EMS on muscle strength, body composition and low-back pain, albeit with respect to training frequency as a crucial parameter, not only for the given outcome but also for participants’ acceptance and compliance with the exercise protocol [ 13 ], the WB-EMS protocols of scientific studies [ 11 , 14 ] vary considerably from the once-weekly 20 min WB-EMS protocol of commercial WB-EMS facilities. Thus, apart from low-back pain ([ 12 , 15 ], evidence for a positive effect of the commercial “once per week” setting on parameters predominately addressed by the resistance type exercise “WB-EMS” (i.e., stability, muscle strength, body composition) is simply still lacking.…”

Quo vadis kommerzielles nicht-medizinisches Ganzkörper-EMS

“…Obwohl die DIN 33961-5 [6], die Empfehlungen des Fachkreis WB-EMS [7] und insbesondere die Strahlenschutzkommis sion (SSK [10]) die private, nicht beaufsichtigte Anwendung von WB-EMS untersagen, liegt ein verbindliches Verbot der privaten nichtüberwachten Anwendung derzeit (noch) nicht vor. Die technologische Entwicklung durchaus berücksichtigend, ist die Bedeutung einer engen Betreuung durch einen erfahrenen und achtsamen Trainer für die effektive [11] und sichere WB-EMS-Anwendung aber essentiell [12]. Schon der gesunde Menschenverstand legt nahe, dass eine exzessive private WB-EMS-Anwendung ohne zertifizierte personelle Unterstützung die Prävalenz von unerwünschten Effekten, signifikant erhöhen wird -mit der Konsequenz einer weiteren Regulierung durch staatliche Behörden.…”

Similar Pain Intensity Reductions and Trunk Strength Improvements Following Whole-Body Electromyostimulation vs. Whole-Body Vibration vs. Conventional Back-Strengthening Training in Chronic Non-specific Low Back Pain Patients: A Three-Armed Randomized Controlled Trial

“…These alternative training methods gaining attention and popularity. The stimulation with WB-EMS and WBV alters the neuro-muscular pattern of muscle recruitment and leads to acute and long-term effects in performance as well as in rehabilitation (Padulo et al, 2014b;Fischer et al, 2019;Kemmler et al, 2021).…”