集群式和传统冲刺间歇运动方法的生理和机械反应。

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q2 PHYSIOLOGY
Refik Çabuk, Yıldırım Kayacan, Juan Manuel Murias, Bettina Karsten
{"title":"集群式和传统冲刺间歇运动方法的生理和机械反应。","authors":"Refik Çabuk, Yıldırım Kayacan, Juan Manuel Murias, Bettina Karsten","doi":"10.1007/s00421-025-05857-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study compared responses to a traditional 30-s all-out sprint interval exercise (SIE) session, compared to two SIE sessions divided into clusters, with the aim to assess which of these sessions would result in higher peak oxygen uptake ( <math><mover><mtext>V</mtext> <mo>˙</mo></mover> </math> O<sub>2peak</sub>), longer time at <math><mover><mtext>V</mtext> <mo>˙</mo></mover> </math> O<sub>2</sub> ≥ respiratory compensation point (RCP), and greater peak power output during SIE (PPO<sub>SIE</sub>).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twelve trained males (19 ± 1 years; 176 ± 5 cm; 65.9 ± 6 kg; <math><mover><mtext>V</mtext> <mo>˙</mo></mover> </math> O<sub>2max</sub>: 54.0 ± 6.2 mL kg<sup>-1</sup> min<sup>-1</sup>) performed three work-matched all-out cycling SIE sessions with a load of 7.5% body mass: (1) SIE30: 4 repetitions of 30-s work with 240-s recovery; (2) SIE15: 4 repetitions of 15-s work with 15-s recovery, plus 15-s work with 225-s recovery; (3) SIE10: 4 repetitions of 10-s work with 10-s recovery, plus 10-s work and 10-s recovery, plus 10-s work with 220-s recovery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>PPO<sub>SIE</sub> for SIE30 (697 ± 71 W) was lower than for SIE15 (732 ± 63 W; p = 0.001) and SIE10 (752 ± 75 W; p = 0.001). <math><mover><mtext>V</mtext> <mo>˙</mo></mover> </math> O<sub>2peak</sub> response for SIE30 (46.5 ± 6.6 mL kg<sup>-1</sup> min<sup>-1</sup>) was lower than for SIE15 (51.9 ± 4.8 mL kg<sup>-1</sup> min<sup>-1</sup>; p = 0.04) and SIE10 (50.9 ± 5.6 mL kg<sup>-1</sup> min<sup>-1</sup>; p = 0.01). Time spent at <math><mover><mtext>V</mtext> <mo>˙</mo></mover> </math> O<sub>2</sub> ≥ RCP was shorter for SIE30 (32.9 ± 35.9 s) compared to SIE15 (95.0 ± 52.0 s; p = 0.001) and SIE10 (62.9 ± 46.1 s; p = 0.010). No differences were identified for these variables between SIE15 and SIE10 (p = 0.270).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Compared to the SIE30 session, the clustering-based SIE protocols resulted in higher PPO<sub>SIE</sub> values, a greater <math><mover><mtext>V</mtext> <mo>˙</mo></mover> </math> O<sub>2peak</sub> response, and longer time spent at <math><mover><mtext>V</mtext> <mo>˙</mo></mover> </math> O<sub>2</sub> ≥ RCP. Thus, clustering methods can maximize the above-mentioned responses and be appealing alternatives to the traditional 30-s SIE session.</p>","PeriodicalId":12005,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Applied Physiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Physiologic and mechanical responses to clustered vs. traditional sprint interval exercise approaches.\",\"authors\":\"Refik Çabuk, Yıldırım Kayacan, Juan Manuel Murias, Bettina Karsten\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00421-025-05857-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study compared responses to a traditional 30-s all-out sprint interval exercise (SIE) session, compared to two SIE sessions divided into clusters, with the aim to assess which of these sessions would result in higher peak oxygen uptake ( <math><mover><mtext>V</mtext> <mo>˙</mo></mover> </math> O<sub>2peak</sub>), longer time at <math><mover><mtext>V</mtext> <mo>˙</mo></mover> </math> O<sub>2</sub> ≥ respiratory compensation point (RCP), and greater peak power output during SIE (PPO<sub>SIE</sub>).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twelve trained males (19 ± 1 years; 176 ± 5 cm; 65.9 ± 6 kg; <math><mover><mtext>V</mtext> <mo>˙</mo></mover> </math> O<sub>2max</sub>: 54.0 ± 6.2 mL kg<sup>-1</sup> min<sup>-1</sup>) performed three work-matched all-out cycling SIE sessions with a load of 7.5% body mass: (1) SIE30: 4 repetitions of 30-s work with 240-s recovery; (2) SIE15: 4 repetitions of 15-s work with 15-s recovery, plus 15-s work with 225-s recovery; (3) SIE10: 4 repetitions of 10-s work with 10-s recovery, plus 10-s work and 10-s recovery, plus 10-s work with 220-s recovery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>PPO<sub>SIE</sub> for SIE30 (697 ± 71 W) was lower than for SIE15 (732 ± 63 W; p = 0.001) and SIE10 (752 ± 75 W; p = 0.001). <math><mover><mtext>V</mtext> <mo>˙</mo></mover> </math> O<sub>2peak</sub> response for SIE30 (46.5 ± 6.6 mL kg<sup>-1</sup> min<sup>-1</sup>) was lower than for SIE15 (51.9 ± 4.8 mL kg<sup>-1</sup> min<sup>-1</sup>; p = 0.04) and SIE10 (50.9 ± 5.6 mL kg<sup>-1</sup> min<sup>-1</sup>; p = 0.01). Time spent at <math><mover><mtext>V</mtext> <mo>˙</mo></mover> </math> O<sub>2</sub> ≥ RCP was shorter for SIE30 (32.9 ± 35.9 s) compared to SIE15 (95.0 ± 52.0 s; p = 0.001) and SIE10 (62.9 ± 46.1 s; p = 0.010). No differences were identified for these variables between SIE15 and SIE10 (p = 0.270).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Compared to the SIE30 session, the clustering-based SIE protocols resulted in higher PPO<sub>SIE</sub> values, a greater <math><mover><mtext>V</mtext> <mo>˙</mo></mover> </math> O<sub>2peak</sub> response, and longer time spent at <math><mover><mtext>V</mtext> <mo>˙</mo></mover> </math> O<sub>2</sub> ≥ RCP. Thus, clustering methods can maximize the above-mentioned responses and be appealing alternatives to the traditional 30-s SIE session.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12005,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Applied Physiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Applied Physiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00421-025-05857-4\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PHYSIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Applied Physiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00421-025-05857-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究比较了传统的30秒全速冲刺间歇运动(SIE)与分成两组的SIE的反应,目的是评估哪一组会导致更高的峰值摄氧量(V˙O2峰值),更长的V˙O2≥呼吸补偿点(RCP)时间,以及更大的SIE峰值功率输出(PPOSIE)。方法:男性12例(19±1岁);176±5厘米;65.9±6公斤;V˙O2max: 54.0±6.2 mL kg-1分钟-1)在7.5%体重的负荷下进行了三次与工作匹配的全力循环SIE训练:(1)SIE30: 4次重复30-s的训练,240-s的恢复;(2) SIE15:重复4次,15-s动作,15-s恢复,加上15-s动作,225-s恢复;(3) SIE10: 10-s动作加10-s动作加10-s动作加10-s动作加220-s动作重复4次。结果:SIE30的posie值(697±71 W)低于SIE15(732±63 W);p = 0.001)和SIE10(752±75 W;p = 0.001)。SIE30的V˙o2峰反应(46.5±6.6 mL kg-1 min-1)低于SIE15(51.9±4.8 mL kg-1 min-1);p = 0.04)和SIE10(50.9±5.6 mL kg-1 min-1;p = 0.01)。SIE30的V˙O2≥RCP持续时间(32.9±35.9 s)短于SIE15(95.0±52.0 s);p = 0.001)和si10(62.9±46.1 s;p = 0.010)。这些变量在SIE15和SIE10之间没有差异(p = 0.270)。结论:与SIE30相比,基于聚类的SIE方案的posie值更高,V˙O2峰响应更大,V˙O2≥RCP的时间更长。因此,聚类方法可以最大化上述响应,并且是传统的30-s SIE会话的有吸引力的替代方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Physiologic and mechanical responses to clustered vs. traditional sprint interval exercise approaches.

Purpose: This study compared responses to a traditional 30-s all-out sprint interval exercise (SIE) session, compared to two SIE sessions divided into clusters, with the aim to assess which of these sessions would result in higher peak oxygen uptake ( V ˙ O2peak), longer time at V ˙ O2 ≥ respiratory compensation point (RCP), and greater peak power output during SIE (PPOSIE).

Methods: Twelve trained males (19 ± 1 years; 176 ± 5 cm; 65.9 ± 6 kg; V ˙ O2max: 54.0 ± 6.2 mL kg-1 min-1) performed three work-matched all-out cycling SIE sessions with a load of 7.5% body mass: (1) SIE30: 4 repetitions of 30-s work with 240-s recovery; (2) SIE15: 4 repetitions of 15-s work with 15-s recovery, plus 15-s work with 225-s recovery; (3) SIE10: 4 repetitions of 10-s work with 10-s recovery, plus 10-s work and 10-s recovery, plus 10-s work with 220-s recovery.

Results: PPOSIE for SIE30 (697 ± 71 W) was lower than for SIE15 (732 ± 63 W; p = 0.001) and SIE10 (752 ± 75 W; p = 0.001). V ˙ O2peak response for SIE30 (46.5 ± 6.6 mL kg-1 min-1) was lower than for SIE15 (51.9 ± 4.8 mL kg-1 min-1; p = 0.04) and SIE10 (50.9 ± 5.6 mL kg-1 min-1; p = 0.01). Time spent at V ˙ O2 ≥ RCP was shorter for SIE30 (32.9 ± 35.9 s) compared to SIE15 (95.0 ± 52.0 s; p = 0.001) and SIE10 (62.9 ± 46.1 s; p = 0.010). No differences were identified for these variables between SIE15 and SIE10 (p = 0.270).

Conclusion: Compared to the SIE30 session, the clustering-based SIE protocols resulted in higher PPOSIE values, a greater V ˙ O2peak response, and longer time spent at V ˙ O2 ≥ RCP. Thus, clustering methods can maximize the above-mentioned responses and be appealing alternatives to the traditional 30-s SIE session.

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
6.00
自引率
6.70%
发文量
227
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Applied Physiology (EJAP) aims to promote mechanistic advances in human integrative and translational physiology. Physiology is viewed broadly, having overlapping context with related disciplines such as biomechanics, biochemistry, endocrinology, ergonomics, immunology, motor control, and nutrition. EJAP welcomes studies dealing with physical exercise, training and performance. Studies addressing physiological mechanisms are preferred over descriptive studies. Papers dealing with animal models or pathophysiological conditions are not excluded from consideration, but must be clearly relevant to human physiology.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信