标准化运动项目的反应变异性和去训练效应

M. J, Montull L, Ventura Jl, J. C., A. D, Balagué N
{"title":"标准化运动项目的反应变异性和去训练效应","authors":"M. J, Montull L, Ventura Jl, J. C., A. D, Balagué N","doi":"10.26420/austinsportsmed.2021.1048","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: To compare inter–individual response variability and detraining effects on markers attributed to aerobic and anaerobic performance after shortterm standardized aerobic, strength and mixed training programs. Methods: Thirty–six male students were randomly assigned to either an aerobic, strength, mixed, or control program (9 per group). They performed two consecutive cycling tests (incremental and plateau) to exhaustion at three points: 1 week before training, after 6 weeks of training, and 3 weeks after the training was finished. Maximal oxygen consumption (VO2max), maximal workload (Wmax), and time to exhaustion performed at Wmax (W × time) were compared between groups by repeated–measures ANOVA with Bonferroni post–hoc tests. The inter–subject response variability within each training group was evaluated by comparison with the 95% confidence interval of the control group. Detraining effects were evaluated using the hysteresis areas, which were compared between each training group and the control group by Mann–Whitney U test. Results: Differences were observed in Wmax for the aerobic (F(2,7)=19.562; p=0.001; n²=0.85) and mixed (F(2,7)=13.447; p=0.004; n²=0.99) programs, and in W × time for the mixed program (F(2,7)=15.432; p= 0.016; n²=0.89). There was high inter–subject response variability for all variables and training programs, except for a homogenous positive response to Wmax in the mixed program (X²=6.27; p=0.04). Detraining effects of Wmax were also better maintained after the mixed program. Conclusion: A mixed program of aerobic and strength training demonstrated higher improvements in the studied markers of performance, with lower interindividual response variability, and longer detraining effects compared with aerobic or strength programs.","PeriodicalId":422719,"journal":{"name":"Austin Sports Medicine","volume":"20 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Response Variability and Detraining Effects of Standardized Exercise Programs\",\"authors\":\"M. J, Montull L, Ventura Jl, J. C., A. D, Balagué N\",\"doi\":\"10.26420/austinsportsmed.2021.1048\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpose: To compare inter–individual response variability and detraining effects on markers attributed to aerobic and anaerobic performance after shortterm standardized aerobic, strength and mixed training programs. Methods: Thirty–six male students were randomly assigned to either an aerobic, strength, mixed, or control program (9 per group). They performed two consecutive cycling tests (incremental and plateau) to exhaustion at three points: 1 week before training, after 6 weeks of training, and 3 weeks after the training was finished. Maximal oxygen consumption (VO2max), maximal workload (Wmax), and time to exhaustion performed at Wmax (W × time) were compared between groups by repeated–measures ANOVA with Bonferroni post–hoc tests. The inter–subject response variability within each training group was evaluated by comparison with the 95% confidence interval of the control group. Detraining effects were evaluated using the hysteresis areas, which were compared between each training group and the control group by Mann–Whitney U test. Results: Differences were observed in Wmax for the aerobic (F(2,7)=19.562; p=0.001; n²=0.85) and mixed (F(2,7)=13.447; p=0.004; n²=0.99) programs, and in W × time for the mixed program (F(2,7)=15.432; p= 0.016; n²=0.89). There was high inter–subject response variability for all variables and training programs, except for a homogenous positive response to Wmax in the mixed program (X²=6.27; p=0.04). Detraining effects of Wmax were also better maintained after the mixed program. Conclusion: A mixed program of aerobic and strength training demonstrated higher improvements in the studied markers of performance, with lower interindividual response variability, and longer detraining effects compared with aerobic or strength programs.\",\"PeriodicalId\":422719,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Austin Sports Medicine\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Austin Sports Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.26420/austinsportsmed.2021.1048\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Austin Sports Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26420/austinsportsmed.2021.1048","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

目的:比较短期标准化有氧、力量和混合训练项目对有氧和无氧表现的个体间反应变异性和去训练效应。方法:36名男学生被随机分配到有氧、力量、混合或控制项目(每组9人)。他们在训练前1周、训练后6周和训练结束后3周三个时间点进行了两次连续的循环测试(增量和平台),直到精疲力竭。最大耗氧量(VO2max)、最大工作量(Wmax)和在Wmax下完成的疲劳时间(W ×时间)通过重复测量方差分析与Bonferroni事后检验进行比较。通过与对照组的95%置信区间比较,评估每个训练组内受试者间的反应变异性。采用迟滞面积评价去训练效果,采用Mann-Whitney U检验比较各训练组与对照组的去训练效果。结果:两组间Wmax存在差异(F(2,7)=19.562;p = 0.001;n²=0.85)和mixed (F(2,7)=13.447;p = 0.004;n²=0.99)方案,在W ×时间内为混合方案(F(2,7)=15.432;p = 0.016;n²= 0.89)。所有变量和训练方案的受试者间反应均有较高的可变性,除了混合方案中对Wmax的同质性正反应(X²=6.27;p = 0.04)。混合方案也能较好地维持Wmax的去训练效果。结论:与有氧和力量训练相比,有氧和力量训练的混合方案在所研究的性能指标方面表现出更高的改善,个体间反应变异性更低,去训练效果更长。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Response Variability and Detraining Effects of Standardized Exercise Programs
Purpose: To compare inter–individual response variability and detraining effects on markers attributed to aerobic and anaerobic performance after shortterm standardized aerobic, strength and mixed training programs. Methods: Thirty–six male students were randomly assigned to either an aerobic, strength, mixed, or control program (9 per group). They performed two consecutive cycling tests (incremental and plateau) to exhaustion at three points: 1 week before training, after 6 weeks of training, and 3 weeks after the training was finished. Maximal oxygen consumption (VO2max), maximal workload (Wmax), and time to exhaustion performed at Wmax (W × time) were compared between groups by repeated–measures ANOVA with Bonferroni post–hoc tests. The inter–subject response variability within each training group was evaluated by comparison with the 95% confidence interval of the control group. Detraining effects were evaluated using the hysteresis areas, which were compared between each training group and the control group by Mann–Whitney U test. Results: Differences were observed in Wmax for the aerobic (F(2,7)=19.562; p=0.001; n²=0.85) and mixed (F(2,7)=13.447; p=0.004; n²=0.99) programs, and in W × time for the mixed program (F(2,7)=15.432; p= 0.016; n²=0.89). There was high inter–subject response variability for all variables and training programs, except for a homogenous positive response to Wmax in the mixed program (X²=6.27; p=0.04). Detraining effects of Wmax were also better maintained after the mixed program. Conclusion: A mixed program of aerobic and strength training demonstrated higher improvements in the studied markers of performance, with lower interindividual response variability, and longer detraining effects compared with aerobic or strength programs.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信