Author(s): EVANGELISTA, A., BARROS, B.M., BASSI, J., CAMARGO, J.B.B., ALONSO, A.C., FAYÇAL, H., FIGUEIRA JÚNIOR, A., CARLE-CALO, A., MALHEIROS, F.C.M., BOCALINI, D.S., Institution: CENTRO UNIVERSITÁRIO CATÓLICO ÍTALO BRASILEIRO / UNIVERSIDADE SÃO JUDAS TADEU, Country: BRAZIL, Abstract-ID: 268

INTRODUCTION:
Whole-body electromyostimulation (WB-EMS) has been investigated as a strategy to intensify neuromuscular stimuli during exercise; however, its ability to potentiate adaptations when combined with bodyweight training protocols remains unclear.
METHODS:
Twenty-eight physically active men and women (27.07 ± 7.33 years; 80.68 ± 18.46 kg; 172.86 ± 10.1 cm; 24.4 ± 7.8% body fat) were randomly allocated into two groups: (1) Bodyweight training group (BW; exercises performed without electrical stimulation, n = 14), and (2) bodyweight training combined with whole-body electromyostimulation (BW+WB-EMS; exercises performed with WB-EMS, n = 14). Training sessions included a 1-minute warm-up followed by 12 bodyweight exercises performed in a circuit for two rounds, with 2 minutes of rest between rounds. Exercises included push-up, jumping jack, squat jump, TRX® elbow extension, mountain climber, close-grip TRX® row, burpee, lunge, TRX® elbow push-up, running in place, abdominal crunch, and skier jack. For BW+WB-EMS group, the WIEMSPRO® device (Málaga, Spain) was set to deliver bipolar current at 80 Hz, 500 ms ramp time, pulse width of 150 to 350 μs, and a duty cycle of 30 seconds of stimulation followed by 10 seconds of rest. The training intervention was performed twice per week for six weeks. Pre- and post-intervention assessments included push-up performance, 1-minute sit-up test, Yo-Yo test (VO₂max estimation), burpee test, and vastus lateralis muscle thickness (MTVL). Body fat percentage and BMI were assessed via tetrapolar bioimpedance (BI.A® – TeraScience, São José dos Campos, São Paulo). Data were analyzed using repeated-measures ANOVA with checks for normality, homogeneity, appropriate corrections, and effect size calculations (p ≤ 0.05).
RESULTS:
Both groups improved push-up performance (BW+WB-EMS: Δ = 17.6%, ES = 0.51, p = 0.0003; BW: Δ = 17.9%, ES = 0.36). Sit-up performance increased significantly in both groups, with greater improvement in BW+WB-EMS (Δ = 18.86%, ES = 0.91, p < 0.0001) compared to BW (Δ = 9.01%, ES = 0.39, p = 0.03). For the burpee test, BW+WB-EMS demonstrated superior gains (Δ = 39.46%, ES = 1.23, p = 0.002) compared to BW (Δ = 20.75%, ES = 0.51, p = 0.28). VO₂max improved only in BW+WB-EMS (Δ = 2.87%, ES = 0.43, p = 0.01), while BW showed no significant change (Δ = 0.76%, ES = 0.13, p = 0.94). Muscle thickness increased similarly in both groups (BW+WB-EMS: Δ = 3.02%, ES = 0.22, p = 0.03; BW: Δ = 3.11%, ES = 0.15, p = 0.02).
CONCLUSION:
Six weeks of bodyweight training induced meaningful improvements in functional performance and modest morphological changes in physically active young adults. However, adding WB-EMS consistently produced larger effect sizes across most functional outcomes, indicating a greater magnitude of improvement, particularly in high-metabolic-demand tasks such as the burpee test, where gains were notably superior compared with bodyweight training alone. WB-EMS also elicited more pronounced improvements in cardiorespiratory fitness.