{"title":"自调节恢复-再分配训练法可缓解阻力训练中神经肌肉和知觉疲劳的性别差异。","authors":"Antonio Dello Iacono, Kevin Watson, Ivan Jukic","doi":"10.1123/ijspp.2023-0357","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To examine the sex differences in performance and perceived fatigue during resistance training prescribed using traditional (TRA) and autoregulation rest-redistribution training (ARRT) approaches.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twelve resistance-trained men and 12 women completed 2 sessions including the bench-press exercise matched for load (75% of 1-repetition maximum), volume (24 repetitions), and total rest (240 s). Sessions were performed in a counterbalanced randomized design with TRA consisting of 3 sets of 8 repetitions with 120-second interset rest and ARRT employing a personalized combination of clusters, repetitions per cluster, and between-clusters rest regulated with a 20% velocity-loss threshold. The effects of TRA and ARRT on velocity loss, unilateral isometric peak force, and rating of fatigue (ROF) were compared between sexes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The velocity loss was generally lower during ARRT compared with TRA (-0.47% [0.11%]), with velocity loss being mitigated by ARRT to a greater extent among males compared with females (-0.37% [0.15%]). A smaller unilateral isometric peak force decline was observed after ARRT than TRA among males compared with females (-38.4 [8.4] N). Lower ROF after ARRT than TRA was found among males compared to females (-1.97 [0.55] AU). Additionally, males reported greater ROF than females across both conditions (1.92 [0.53] AU), and ARRT resulted in lower ROF than TRA overall (-0.83 [0.39] AU).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The ARRT approach resulted in decreased velocity loss, peak force impairment, and ROF compared with TRA in both sexes. However, male subjects exhibited more pronounced acute within-session benefits from the ARRT method.</p>","PeriodicalId":14295,"journal":{"name":"International journal of sports physiology and performance","volume":" ","pages":"685-695"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Autoregulation Rest-Redistribution Training Method Mitigates Sex Differences in Neuromuscular and Perceived Fatigue During Resistance Training.\",\"authors\":\"Antonio Dello Iacono, Kevin Watson, Ivan Jukic\",\"doi\":\"10.1123/ijspp.2023-0357\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To examine the sex differences in performance and perceived fatigue during resistance training prescribed using traditional (TRA) and autoregulation rest-redistribution training (ARRT) approaches.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twelve resistance-trained men and 12 women completed 2 sessions including the bench-press exercise matched for load (75% of 1-repetition maximum), volume (24 repetitions), and total rest (240 s). Sessions were performed in a counterbalanced randomized design with TRA consisting of 3 sets of 8 repetitions with 120-second interset rest and ARRT employing a personalized combination of clusters, repetitions per cluster, and between-clusters rest regulated with a 20% velocity-loss threshold. The effects of TRA and ARRT on velocity loss, unilateral isometric peak force, and rating of fatigue (ROF) were compared between sexes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The velocity loss was generally lower during ARRT compared with TRA (-0.47% [0.11%]), with velocity loss being mitigated by ARRT to a greater extent among males compared with females (-0.37% [0.15%]). A smaller unilateral isometric peak force decline was observed after ARRT than TRA among males compared with females (-38.4 [8.4] N). Lower ROF after ARRT than TRA was found among males compared to females (-1.97 [0.55] AU). Additionally, males reported greater ROF than females across both conditions (1.92 [0.53] AU), and ARRT resulted in lower ROF than TRA overall (-0.83 [0.39] AU).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The ARRT approach resulted in decreased velocity loss, peak force impairment, and ROF compared with TRA in both sexes. However, male subjects exhibited more pronounced acute within-session benefits from the ARRT method.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14295,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International journal of sports physiology and performance\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"685-695\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International journal of sports physiology and performance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2023-0357\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Print\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PHYSIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of sports physiology and performance","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2023-0357","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Print","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:研究使用传统(TRA)和自动调节休息-再分配训练(ARRT)方法进行阻力训练时,男女在成绩和感觉疲劳方面的差异:12名接受过阻力训练的男性和12名女性分别完成了两次卧推训练,训练内容包括与负荷(75%的单次最大值)、训练量(24次)和总休息时间(240秒)相匹配的卧推训练。训练以平衡随机设计的方式进行,其中 TRA 包括 3 组 8 次重复,组间休息 120 秒;ARRT 采用个性化的组群组合、每组重复次数和组间休息,速度损失阈值为 20%。比较了 TRA 和 ARRT 对男女速度损失、单侧等长峰值力和疲劳评级(ROF)的影响:结果:与 TRA 相比,ARRT 期间的速度损失普遍较低(-0.47% [0.11%]),与女性相比,ARRT 对速度损失的缓解程度更高(-0.37% [0.15%])。与 TRA 相比,ARRT 后男性单侧等长峰值力下降幅度更小(-38.4 [8.4] N)。与女性相比,男性在 ARRT 后的 ROF 更低(-1.97 [0.55] AU)。此外,在两种情况下,男性的 ROF 均高于女性(1.92 [0.53] AU),ARRT 的 ROF 总体低于 TRA(-0.83 [0.39] AU):结论:与 TRA 相比,ARRT 方法可减少男女受试者的速度损失、峰值力损伤和 ROF。然而,男性受试者从 ARRT 方法中获得的急性期内收益更为明显。
The Autoregulation Rest-Redistribution Training Method Mitigates Sex Differences in Neuromuscular and Perceived Fatigue During Resistance Training.
Purpose: To examine the sex differences in performance and perceived fatigue during resistance training prescribed using traditional (TRA) and autoregulation rest-redistribution training (ARRT) approaches.
Methods: Twelve resistance-trained men and 12 women completed 2 sessions including the bench-press exercise matched for load (75% of 1-repetition maximum), volume (24 repetitions), and total rest (240 s). Sessions were performed in a counterbalanced randomized design with TRA consisting of 3 sets of 8 repetitions with 120-second interset rest and ARRT employing a personalized combination of clusters, repetitions per cluster, and between-clusters rest regulated with a 20% velocity-loss threshold. The effects of TRA and ARRT on velocity loss, unilateral isometric peak force, and rating of fatigue (ROF) were compared between sexes.
Results: The velocity loss was generally lower during ARRT compared with TRA (-0.47% [0.11%]), with velocity loss being mitigated by ARRT to a greater extent among males compared with females (-0.37% [0.15%]). A smaller unilateral isometric peak force decline was observed after ARRT than TRA among males compared with females (-38.4 [8.4] N). Lower ROF after ARRT than TRA was found among males compared to females (-1.97 [0.55] AU). Additionally, males reported greater ROF than females across both conditions (1.92 [0.53] AU), and ARRT resulted in lower ROF than TRA overall (-0.83 [0.39] AU).
Conclusions: The ARRT approach resulted in decreased velocity loss, peak force impairment, and ROF compared with TRA in both sexes. However, male subjects exhibited more pronounced acute within-session benefits from the ARRT method.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance (IJSPP) focuses on sport physiology and performance and is dedicated to advancing the knowledge of sport and exercise physiologists, sport-performance researchers, and other sport scientists. The journal publishes authoritative peer-reviewed research in sport physiology and related disciplines, with an emphasis on work having direct practical applications in enhancing sport performance in sport physiology and related disciplines. IJSPP publishes 10 issues per year: January, February, March, April, May, July, August, September, October, and November.