Men Achieve Impressive 7.3% Increase in Leg Strength with Innovative WB-EMS Workouts

Read the summary of this evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine study on EMS.

Study Title: Effects of Whole-Body Electromyostimulation versus High-Intensity Resistance Exercise on Body Composition and Strength: A Randomized Controlled Study

Publication: Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine (2016)

Authors: Kemmler W., Teschner M., Weissenfels A., von Stengel S., Fronlich M., Matthias K., Bebenek M.

Read Katalyst's Summary

This study compared two different exercise methods, High-Intensity Resistance Exercise (HIT) and Whole-Body Electromyostimulation (WB-EMS), to see which is better for improving body composition and muscle strength in middle-aged men. They had 48 men between 30 and 50 years old participate. The HIT group did resistance exercises twice a week, while the WB-EMS group did EMS workouts three times every two weeks, for 16 weeks. Both groups saw improvements in lean body mass (muscle) and leg strength. However, there wasn't a significant difference between the two groups regarding these improvements. So, both methods are effective, but WB-EMS is quicker. EMS can be a good choice for people looking to improve their strength and body composition.

“Both methods are effective, but WB-EMS is quicker, though it might be more expensive."

Check out more specific key findings below: 

  • Both HIT and WB-EMS are effective: Both High-Intensity Resistance Exercise (HIT) and Whole-Body Electromyostimulation (WB-EMS) resulted in significant improvements in lean body mass (muscle) for the participants. HIT showed a 1.25% increase, and WB-EMS showed a 0.93% increase in lean body mass.
  • Similar leg strength gains: Both groups also experienced increased leg strength. HIT led to a 12.7% improvement, while WB-EMS resulted in a 7.3% increase in leg strength. Importantly, there was no significant difference in leg strength improvement between the two groups.
  • Time-efficiency vs. cost: WB-EMS was found to be a time-efficient option as it required fewer sessions, but it was noted as potentially pricier compared to HIT. So, individuals looking to improve their overall strength and body composition may consider the trade-off between time and cost when choosing between these two methods.