负重训练与阻力训练对中年休闲跑步者的跑步经济性和 5 公里跑步时间的影响。

Yuuri Eihara, Kenji Takao, Takashi Sugiyama, Sumiaki Maeo, Hiroaki Kanehisa, Tadao Isaka
{"title":"负重训练与阻力训练对中年休闲跑步者的跑步经济性和 5 公里跑步时间的影响。","authors":"Yuuri Eihara, Kenji Takao, Takashi Sugiyama, Sumiaki Maeo, Hiroaki Kanehisa, Tadao Isaka","doi":"10.1002/ejsc.12197","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The effects of plyometric training (PT) versus resistance training (RT) on running economy and performance are unclear, especially in middle-aged recreational runners. We examined (1) the efficacy of PT versus RT on running economy and performance in middle-aged recreational runners and (2) the relationships between the main training outcomes. Twenty middle-aged recreational runners were randomly allocated to a PT or RT group (n = 10/group). Training was conducted twice/week for 10 weeks combined with daily running. PT included the countermovement jump (CMJ), rebound jump, hurdle hop, and drop jump. RT consisted of leg press, leg curl, and calf raise with 50%-90% of one-repetition maximum (1RM). Before and after the intervention, 1RM of the three lifting tasks, CMJ and drop jump performances, oxygen cost at 8-12 km/h, and 5 km running time were assessed. PT enhanced 1RM of leg curl only (8.5% and p = 0.007), whereas RT increased 1RM of the three lifting tasks (19.0%-21.1% and p < 0.001). Both groups improved CMJ height (6.4%-8.3% and p = 0.016) and drop jump performance (height: 9.7%-19.4%, p = 0.005, height/contact time: 11.4%-26.3% and p = 0.009) and oxygen cost regardless of running velocity (2.0% and p = 0.001) without significant group differences. However, neither group changed the 5-km running time (p ≥ 0.259). A significant correlation was found between the changes in calf raise 1RM and oxygen cost (r = -0.477 and p = 0.046) but not between the other measured variables. These results suggest that for middle-aged recreational runners, PT and RT can similarly improve running economy albeit not necessarily the 5-km running time, and enhancing plantarflexion strength may particularly contribute to improving running economy.</p>","PeriodicalId":93999,"journal":{"name":"European journal of sport science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The effects of plyometric versus resistance training on running economy and 5-km running time in middle-aged recreational runners.\",\"authors\":\"Yuuri Eihara, Kenji Takao, Takashi Sugiyama, Sumiaki Maeo, Hiroaki Kanehisa, Tadao Isaka\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ejsc.12197\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The effects of plyometric training (PT) versus resistance training (RT) on running economy and performance are unclear, especially in middle-aged recreational runners. We examined (1) the efficacy of PT versus RT on running economy and performance in middle-aged recreational runners and (2) the relationships between the main training outcomes. Twenty middle-aged recreational runners were randomly allocated to a PT or RT group (n = 10/group). Training was conducted twice/week for 10 weeks combined with daily running. PT included the countermovement jump (CMJ), rebound jump, hurdle hop, and drop jump. RT consisted of leg press, leg curl, and calf raise with 50%-90% of one-repetition maximum (1RM). Before and after the intervention, 1RM of the three lifting tasks, CMJ and drop jump performances, oxygen cost at 8-12 km/h, and 5 km running time were assessed. PT enhanced 1RM of leg curl only (8.5% and p = 0.007), whereas RT increased 1RM of the three lifting tasks (19.0%-21.1% and p < 0.001). Both groups improved CMJ height (6.4%-8.3% and p = 0.016) and drop jump performance (height: 9.7%-19.4%, p = 0.005, height/contact time: 11.4%-26.3% and p = 0.009) and oxygen cost regardless of running velocity (2.0% and p = 0.001) without significant group differences. However, neither group changed the 5-km running time (p ≥ 0.259). A significant correlation was found between the changes in calf raise 1RM and oxygen cost (r = -0.477 and p = 0.046) but not between the other measured variables. These results suggest that for middle-aged recreational runners, PT and RT can similarly improve running economy albeit not necessarily the 5-km running time, and enhancing plantarflexion strength may particularly contribute to improving running economy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93999,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European journal of sport science\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European journal of sport science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsc.12197\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European journal of sport science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsc.12197","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

负重训练(PT)与阻力训练(RT)对跑步经济性和成绩的影响尚不明确,尤其是在中年休闲跑步者中。我们研究了 (1) 负重训练与阻力训练对中年休闲跑步者的跑步经济性和成绩的影响,以及 (2) 主要训练结果之间的关系。20 名中年休闲跑步者被随机分配到 PT 组或 RT 组(n = 10/组)。训练与日常跑步相结合,每周两次,为期 10 周。PT训练包括反身跳(CMJ)、反弹跳、跨栏跳和落地跳。RT包括压腿、卷腿和小腿抬高,训练量为单次最大重量(1RM)的50%-90%。在干预前后,对三项举重任务的 1RM 、CMJ 和落点跳的表现、8-12 公里/小时的耗氧量和 5 公里跑步时间进行了评估。PT仅提高了卷腿的1RM(8.5%,p = 0.007),而RT提高了三项举重任务的1RM(19.0%-21.1%,p = 0.007)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The effects of plyometric versus resistance training on running economy and 5-km running time in middle-aged recreational runners.

The effects of plyometric training (PT) versus resistance training (RT) on running economy and performance are unclear, especially in middle-aged recreational runners. We examined (1) the efficacy of PT versus RT on running economy and performance in middle-aged recreational runners and (2) the relationships between the main training outcomes. Twenty middle-aged recreational runners were randomly allocated to a PT or RT group (n = 10/group). Training was conducted twice/week for 10 weeks combined with daily running. PT included the countermovement jump (CMJ), rebound jump, hurdle hop, and drop jump. RT consisted of leg press, leg curl, and calf raise with 50%-90% of one-repetition maximum (1RM). Before and after the intervention, 1RM of the three lifting tasks, CMJ and drop jump performances, oxygen cost at 8-12 km/h, and 5 km running time were assessed. PT enhanced 1RM of leg curl only (8.5% and p = 0.007), whereas RT increased 1RM of the three lifting tasks (19.0%-21.1% and p < 0.001). Both groups improved CMJ height (6.4%-8.3% and p = 0.016) and drop jump performance (height: 9.7%-19.4%, p = 0.005, height/contact time: 11.4%-26.3% and p = 0.009) and oxygen cost regardless of running velocity (2.0% and p = 0.001) without significant group differences. However, neither group changed the 5-km running time (p ≥ 0.259). A significant correlation was found between the changes in calf raise 1RM and oxygen cost (r = -0.477 and p = 0.046) but not between the other measured variables. These results suggest that for middle-aged recreational runners, PT and RT can similarly improve running economy albeit not necessarily the 5-km running time, and enhancing plantarflexion strength may particularly contribute to improving running economy.

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