Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Appears in Collections:Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport Journal Articles
Peer Review Status: Unrefereed
Title: Authors' Reply to Valenzuela et al: Comment on: "Assessment of Skeletal Muscle Contractile Properties by Radial Displacement: The Case for Tensiomyography"
Author(s): Hunter, Angus
Contact Email:
Issue Date: 1-Jun-2019
Citation: Hunter A (2019) Authors' Reply to Valenzuela et al: Comment on: "Assessment of Skeletal Muscle Contractile Properties by Radial Displacement: The Case for Tensiomyography". Commentary on: Valenzuela PL, Sánchez-Martínez G, Torrontegi E, Vázquez-Carrión J, Montalvo Z, Lucia A. Comment on: “Assessment of skeletal muscle contractile properties by radial displacement: the case for tensiomyography” (letter). Sports Med. 2018. Sports Medicine, 49 (6), pp. 977-978.
Abstract: First paragraph: We thank Valenzuela et al. [1] for their insightful commentary regarding our review and appreciate the interest shown in our article [2]. We certainly agree that predicting performance by measuring muscle contractile properties with tensiomyography (TMG) is an intriguing proposition. As underlined by Valenzuela et al. [1], the progressive evidence for TMG predicting the distribution of type I/II muscle fibres is convincing, culminating in the robust study by Šimunič et al. [3], which we highlighted as the main source of construct validity assessment for TMG [2]. Furthermore, a recent study by Šimunič et al. [4] revealed slower contraction time (Tc) among those masters athletes with a higher proportion of type I and/or IIa muscle fibres than type IIx. That said, we urge caution regarding interpretation of muscle belly radial displacement (Dm) as a direct indicator of muscle stiffness. To date, there remains limited research experimentally isolating intrinsic muscle stiffness when evaluating TMG as a measure of contractile mechanics. As such, when TMG has been used to assess muscle status, it has been difficult to differentiate between changes associated with excitation–contraction coupling or muscle stiffness, as in most situations both parameters may be affected. We [2] referred to the shortage of studies directly assessing changes in Dm associated with altering muscle stiffness via experimental intervention; however, since then, we ourselves have published a study demonstrating increased Dm following a self-massage treatment [5]. Still, we cannot say for sure that these observed changes were the result of decreased muscle stiffness.
DOI Link: 10.1007/s40279-018-0988-z
Rights: The publisher does not allow this work to be made publicly available in this Repository. Please use the Request a Copy feature at the foot of the Repository record to request a copy directly from the author. You can only request a copy if you wish to use this work for your own research or private study.

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Hunter-2018-SM.pdfFulltext - Published Version673.78 kBAdobe PDFUnder Permanent Embargo    Request a copy

Note: If any of the files in this item are currently embargoed, you can request a copy directly from the author by clicking the padlock icon above. However, this facility is dependent on the depositor still being contactable at their original email address.

This item is protected by original copyright

Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.