ArticleScientific reports2025
Forearm elevation impairs local static handgrip endurance likely through reduction in vascular conductance and perfusion pressure: revisiting Rohmert's curve.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Maximal isometric contraction time (MICT) is critical for most motor tasks and depends on skeletal muscle blood flow at < 40% of maximal voluntary strength (MVC). Whether limb work positions associated with reduced perfusion pressure and facilitated vessel compression affect MICT is largely unknown. In 14 healthy young men we therefore assessed bilateral handgrip MICT at 15, 20, 30, 40, and 70% of MVC in horizontal forearm positions of 0.0, + 27.5 or - 27.5 cm relative to heart level. Forearm blood flow (FBF, venous occlusion plethysmography) and brachial blood pressure were measured repetitively. MICT at 15% MVC was significantly shorter by 66.3 and 86.2 s with forearm position + 27.5 cm (389.6 ± 23.3 s) as compared to 0.0 cm (455.9 ± 34.1 s) and - 27.5 cm (475.8 ± 35.0 s) while MICT at 20-70% MVC was unaffected. Peak FBF at 15% MVC was significantly lower in position + 27.5 cm (11.11 ± 0.92 ml/min/100 ml) compared to 0.0 cm (15.55 ± 0.91 ml/min/100 ml) or - 27.5 cm (14.21 ± 0.59 ml/min/100 ml) and vascular resistance significantly higher in position + 27.5 vs 0.0 or - 27.5 cm. Working position above, but not below heart level may limit MICT at 15% MVC possibly through blood flow reduction arising from increased vascular resistance beside reduced perfusion pressure. Local isometric endurance warrants (re)evaluation regarding hydrostatic/gravitational or other hemodynamic limitations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.