积极和消极言语指示与假性缺血预处理相关的训练男性膝关节伸展阻力运动的中度改善。

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 PHYSIOLOGY
Hiago L R Souza, Philip Hurst, Géssyca T Oliveira, Anderson Meireles, Rhaí A Arriel, Rodrigo Hohl, Marco A C Garcia, Moacir Marocolo
{"title":"积极和消极言语指示与假性缺血预处理相关的训练男性膝关节伸展阻力运动的中度改善。","authors":"Hiago L R Souza, Philip Hurst, Géssyca T Oliveira, Anderson Meireles, Rhaí A Arriel, Rodrigo Hohl, Marco A C Garcia, Moacir Marocolo","doi":"10.1123/ijspp.2024-0217","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To verify the effects of positive and negative verbal instructions regarding sham ischemic preconditioning (sham-IPC) on leg-extension resistance-exercise performance.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Thirty-five trained men were randomized to 1 of 3 groups: positive expectation, negative expectation, or control. Participants completed leg-extension strength tests in 4 trials (2 familiarization, 1 baseline, and 1 experimental). Experimental trials consisted of participants' receiving sham-IPC (3 × 5 cycles at only 20 mmHg). In positive- and negative-expectation groups, participants received verbal instructions that would improve or worsen performance, respectively. Controls did not receive any verbal suggestion. Outcomes were maximum number of repetitions, maximal isometric voluntary contraction, and muscle power output.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Expectations about sham-IPC were significantly higher in the positive-expectation than in the negative-expectation and control groups. Participants in the positive group reported a significantly greater number of repetitions than both the negative-expectation (d = 1.11) and control groups (d = 0.77). No differences between groups were shown for maximal isometric voluntary contraction (d range = 0.05-0.67) and power output (d range = -0.08 to 1.02).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our results highlight the importance of measuring expectations prior to sham-IPC, which may significantly influence the results of randomized controlled trials.</p>","PeriodicalId":14295,"journal":{"name":"International journal of sports physiology and performance","volume":" ","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Positive and Negative Verbal Instructions Associated With Sham Ischemic Preconditioning Moderate Improvements of Knee-Extension Resistance Exercise in Trained Men.\",\"authors\":\"Hiago L R Souza, Philip Hurst, Géssyca T Oliveira, Anderson Meireles, Rhaí A Arriel, Rodrigo Hohl, Marco A C Garcia, Moacir Marocolo\",\"doi\":\"10.1123/ijspp.2024-0217\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To verify the effects of positive and negative verbal instructions regarding sham ischemic preconditioning (sham-IPC) on leg-extension resistance-exercise performance.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Thirty-five trained men were randomized to 1 of 3 groups: positive expectation, negative expectation, or control. Participants completed leg-extension strength tests in 4 trials (2 familiarization, 1 baseline, and 1 experimental). Experimental trials consisted of participants' receiving sham-IPC (3 × 5 cycles at only 20 mmHg). In positive- and negative-expectation groups, participants received verbal instructions that would improve or worsen performance, respectively. Controls did not receive any verbal suggestion. Outcomes were maximum number of repetitions, maximal isometric voluntary contraction, and muscle power output.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Expectations about sham-IPC were significantly higher in the positive-expectation than in the negative-expectation and control groups. Participants in the positive group reported a significantly greater number of repetitions than both the negative-expectation (d = 1.11) and control groups (d = 0.77). No differences between groups were shown for maximal isometric voluntary contraction (d range = 0.05-0.67) and power output (d range = -0.08 to 1.02).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our results highlight the importance of measuring expectations prior to sham-IPC, which may significantly influence the results of randomized controlled trials.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14295,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International journal of sports physiology and performance\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-8\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-09\",\"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.2024-0217\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"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.2024-0217","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:验证假缺血预处理(sham- ipc)的正、负口头指导对腿伸阻力运动表现的影响。方法:35名受过训练的男性随机分为3组:积极期望组、消极期望组和对照组。参与者在4个试验中完成了腿部伸展力量测试(2个熟悉试验,1个基线试验和1个实验试验)。实验试验包括参与者接受假ipc (3 × 5周期,仅20 mmHg)。在积极期望组和消极期望组中,参与者分别收到了提高或降低表现的口头指示。对照组没有收到任何口头建议。结果是最大重复次数、最大等长自主收缩和肌肉力量输出。结果:正期望组对假性ipc的期望显著高于负期望组和对照组。积极组的参与者报告的重复次数明显多于消极组(d = 1.11)和对照组(d = 0.77)。各组之间在最大等长自主收缩(d范围= 0.05-0.67)和功率输出(d范围= -0.08至1.02)方面没有差异。结论:我们的研究结果强调了在假ipc之前测量预期的重要性,这可能会显著影响随机对照试验的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Positive and Negative Verbal Instructions Associated With Sham Ischemic Preconditioning Moderate Improvements of Knee-Extension Resistance Exercise in Trained Men.

Purpose: To verify the effects of positive and negative verbal instructions regarding sham ischemic preconditioning (sham-IPC) on leg-extension resistance-exercise performance.

Methods: Thirty-five trained men were randomized to 1 of 3 groups: positive expectation, negative expectation, or control. Participants completed leg-extension strength tests in 4 trials (2 familiarization, 1 baseline, and 1 experimental). Experimental trials consisted of participants' receiving sham-IPC (3 × 5 cycles at only 20 mmHg). In positive- and negative-expectation groups, participants received verbal instructions that would improve or worsen performance, respectively. Controls did not receive any verbal suggestion. Outcomes were maximum number of repetitions, maximal isometric voluntary contraction, and muscle power output.

Results: Expectations about sham-IPC were significantly higher in the positive-expectation than in the negative-expectation and control groups. Participants in the positive group reported a significantly greater number of repetitions than both the negative-expectation (d = 1.11) and control groups (d = 0.77). No differences between groups were shown for maximal isometric voluntary contraction (d range = 0.05-0.67) and power output (d range = -0.08 to 1.02).

Conclusions: Our results highlight the importance of measuring expectations prior to sham-IPC, which may significantly influence the results of randomized controlled trials.

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
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
12.10%
发文量
199
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
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.
×
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