Quick Overview
Does how you train with EMS matter?
Researchers at Spain’s University of Granada tested this with 12 recreational runners.
Both groups did one supervised full body EMS session a week for 6 weeks.
One group did running-style workouts with strength moves, jumps and treadmill intervals. The other did a standard EMS circuit.
The running-style group improved VO2max by about 5%, compared with about 2%. They also used up to 6% less oxygen at a hard running pace.
The study was small and included only men. Still, it suggests the design of an EMS workout really matters.
We always provide direct links to the original research at the end of every article so you can review the evidence yourself.
Does HOW You Train With EMS Matter as Much as Using It?
Part 2 of our runners series.
In Part 1, we looked at runners who swapped most of their running for one full body EMS session a week.
The same research team asked a second question: does the type of EMS workout matter?
The answer was a clear yes.
The quick answer
- Two groups of runners both did full body EMS once a week for 6 weeks.
- One group did running-style workouts that changed from week to week.
- The other did a standard EMS circuit of general exercises.
- The running-style group improved much more on aerobic fitness, running economy and jumping.
Who ran the study?
The study came from the University of Granada in Spain. Its sports science researchers are known worldwide.
It was published in 2018 in Frontiers in Physiology, a peer-reviewed open-access journal.
The trial was registered in advance (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03425981) and approved by the university’s ethics committee.
Who took part?
Fifteen healthy male recreational runners signed up, and 12 finished the study. Three dropped out for work or family reasons.
They were in their mid to late 20s and had been running 2–3 times a week for at least a year.
None had tried full body EMS before.
How the training worked
Both groups stopped their usual running. Each week they did:
- one supervised full body EMS session (12–20 minutes), and
- one short treadmill run for testing.
A certified personal trainer supervised every session.
The difference was the workout design.
Group 1: running-style workouts (6 runners)
- Each session had four parts: warm-up, strength moves, fast power moves, and short running intervals on a treadmill.
- The exercises were chosen for runners, such as lunges, Bulgarian squats, skipping and jumps.
- The EMS settings changed for each part of the session and grew over the 6 weeks.
Group 2: standard EMS circuit (6 runners)
- 10 general exercises with no weights, like half squats with arm movements.
- The same EMS setting throughout.
- This is the classic style used in many earlier EMS studies.
Result 1: aerobic fitness (VO2max)
VO2max measures how much oxygen your body can use during hard exercise. Higher is better.
| Group | Change in VO2max |
|---|---|
| Running-style workouts | +2.75 ml/kg/min (about +5%) |
| Standard EMS circuit | +1.03 ml/kg/min (about +2%) |
The running-style group improved significantly more.
Result 2: running economy
Running economy shows how much oxygen you need to run at a set speed. Using less oxygen is better. It means running feels more efficient.
| Pace | Running-style workouts | Standard EMS circuit |
|---|---|---|
| Easy pace | About 3.7% less oxygen | About 1.6% less (not significant) |
| Hard pace | About 6.2% less oxygen | About 1.4% less (not significant) |
At the harder pace, the difference between groups showed up by week 4.
Result 3: the “hard pace” threshold
Researchers also tested the point where running starts to feel really hard (called VT2).
- The running-style group could work at a higher level before reaching that point.
- The standard circuit group didn’t change significantly.
Result 4: jumping
| Jump test | Running-style workouts | Standard EMS circuit |
|---|---|---|
| Normal jump (hands on hips) | Improved | Improved (similar) |
| Arm-swing jump | +2.95 cm | +0.52 cm (no real change) |
Both groups jumped higher in the normal test. Only the running-style group improved in the arm-swing jump, which needs coordination.
Why did it work better?
The researchers had some ideas. These are theories, not proven facts.
- The running-style group did running intervals with EMS, which is closer to real running.
- Their exercises were specific to runners.
- Changing the workout over time may have given their bodies new challenges each week.
The researchers couldn’t tell which part made the biggest difference: the exercises, the EMS settings, or the mix.
What this study does NOT show
- It doesn’t compare EMS with normal running. Both groups used EMS. (Part 1 covered that comparison.)
- It’s very small. Only 6 runners were in each group.
- It only included young adult men who were recreational runners.
- It lasted 6 weeks. Longer-term results are unknown.
- The runners were new to EMS, and new training often brings fast early gains.
- These runners trained with professional, supervised full body EMS. The study didn’t test home devices.
The researchers’ key message
The authors said full body EMS should be carefully designed and supervised, both for safety and for results. They warned it shouldn’t be treated as a “completely autonomous” training method.
In other words, the plan matters, not just the technology.
The bottom line
Same runners. Same 6 weeks. Same one session a week.
The group whose EMS workouts were built around running improved more in aerobic fitness, running efficiency and coordinated jumping.
If you use EMS, how you train with it may matter as much as whether you use it. Always follow your device’s instructions. A qualified trainer can help you plan your sessions.
This article summarises published research for general information and education only. It isn’t medical advice. Results may not apply to everyone. EMS devices are fitness products and are not intended to diagnose, treat or prevent any condition.
Study: Amaro-Gahete FJ, De-la-O A, Sanchez-Delgado G, Robles-Gonzalez L, Jurado-Fasoli L, Ruiz JR, Gutiérrez A. Functional Exercise Training and Undulating Periodization Enhances the Effect of Whole-Body Electromyostimulation Training on Running Performance. Frontiers in Physiology. 2018;9:720. doi:10.3389/fphys.2018.00720
Featured Product
ORIEMS FIT ULTIMATE KIT 💪 is a 100% Australian award-winning product.
Voted YEAR’S BEST ⭐ for 2024 and 2025.
It is a wide-range targeted muscle stimulator enhanced with EMS technology, designed to support your fitness and relaxation routine. 🌟
Trusted by more than 10,000 happy users with over 450 five-star Google reviews. 😊
Check availability.
Product Disclaimer:
This product is designed only to support fitness and relaxation routines. It is not a medical device and has not been evaluated or registered by the TGA. It is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease or medical condition. It may not be suitable for everyone. Please consult your doctor or healthcare practitioner before using it.
Like this Research Digest? 📚Share it with your friends 💬👇 |
About Our Health Research Digest
We bring you the latest and most important health research papers — simplified and easy to understand.
Each study is broken down into clear, concise summaries and engaging podcasts, with direct links to the original research so you can explore further whenever you like.
We also create content based on your requests. If you’re curious about a specific health topic or would like us to find relevant studies, simplify the findings, and turn them into a podcast, just let us know.
Don’t hesitate to reach out — we’re here to help make health research accessible and useful for you. Contact us anytime.
More EMS Research Scientists Are Studying
1. Can EMS reduce fat?
2. Can EMS increase calorie burn while sitting?
3. Can EMS support muscle toning and muscle gains?
4. Can EMS improve athletic training?
5. Can EMS play a role in muscle loss & frailty?
6. Can EMS reduce pain?
7. EMS vs TENS: What are the differences?
8. Can EMS play a role after stroke?
Research Summary
| Item | Detail |
|---|---|
| Study title | Functional Exercise Training and Undulating Periodization Enhances the Effect of Whole-Body Electromyostimulation Training on Running Performance |
| Authors | Amaro-Gahete FJ, De-la-O A, Sanchez-Delgado G, Robles-Gonzalez L, Jurado-Fasoli L, Ruiz JR, Gutiérrez A |
| Institution | University of Granada, Spain |
| Journal | Frontiers in Physiology (peer-reviewed, open access) |
| Year | 2018 |
| Registration | ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03425981; university ethics approval |
| Participants | 12 healthy male recreational runners (15 enrolled) |
| Age | Mid to late 20s (group averages about 26–27) |
| Running background | 2–3 runs a week for at least a year; no prior EMS |
| Study length | 6 weeks |
| Training | 1 supervised full body EMS session a week (12–20 min) plus 1 short test run; usual running stopped |
| Group 1 | Running-style workouts: warm-up, strength, power and treadmill intervals, with EMS settings that changed |
| Group 2 | Standard EMS circuit: 10 general exercises, fixed EMS setting |
| VO2max | +2.75 vs +1.03 ml/kg/min (about +5% vs +2%) |
| Running economy, easy pace | About 3.7% vs 1.6% less oxygen |
| Running economy, hard pace | About 6.2% vs 1.4% less oxygen (difference from week 4) |
| Hard-pace threshold (VT2) | Improved in group 1 only |
| Normal jump | Improved in both groups (similar) |
| Arm-swing jump | +2.95 cm vs +0.52 cm |
| Side effects | None reported |
| Limitations | Very small; men only; 6 weeks; no non-EMS group; supervised professional sessions |
| Funding | Spanish Ministry of Education and University of Granada; part of a PhD thesis |
| Platform | Listen Now |
|---|---|
 Apple Podcasts |
Listen on Apple |
 Spotify |
Listen on Spotify |
 YouTube |
Watch on YouTube |
 Amazon Audible |
Listen on Audible |
 Podbean |
Listen on Podbean |
Disclaimer
This article is published for general information and educational purposes only. It does not constitute medical advice, health advice, diagnosis, or treatment of any kind.
All content on this website, including any studies, research, or information mentioned, is provided for informational purposes only and does not imply or guarantee any specific health outcomes.
We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or connected in any way to any researchers, universities, research centres, journals, or institutions referenced in any article. No reference to any study, researcher, or publication should be interpreted as an endorsement or recommendation of any products sold or featured on this website.
Our products (and any products featured or linked in this article) are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, prevent, or manage any disease or medical condition. Individual results may vary significantly. No guarantees or warranties are made regarding effectiveness, safety, or specific outcomes.
Always consult a qualified healthcare professional before using any product mentioned on this website or making any changes to your health routine, especially if you have a pre-existing medical condition, are pregnant, breastfeeding, have a pacemaker, or are taking medication.
To the fullest extent permitted by law, ORIEMS FIT, its directors, employees, authors, affiliates, and agents disclaim all liability for any loss, damage, cost, expense, or injury (whether direct, indirect, consequential, special, or incidental) arising from the use of, or reliance upon, any information in this article or from the purchase or use of any products featured or sold on this website.
© [ORIEMS FIT] – All Rights Reserved.
