急性血流量限制对攀爬特异性试验的影响

Q3 Social Sciences
A. Saeterbakken, V. Andersen, N. Stien, Helene Pedersen, T. E. Solstad, M. Shaw, Mari Hårstad Meslo, A. Wergeland, Vegard Vereide, Espen Hermans
{"title":"急性血流量限制对攀爬特异性试验的影响","authors":"A. Saeterbakken, V. Andersen, N. Stien, Helene Pedersen, T. E. Solstad, M. Shaw, Mari Hårstad Meslo, A. Wergeland, Vegard Vereide, Espen Hermans","doi":"10.1051/sm/2020004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of the study was to compare climbing specific performance tests with and without blood flow restriction (BFR). Thirty one climbers (age 26.9 ± 5.5 years, height 177.2 ± 7.5 cm, weight 70.5 ± 8.3 kg, fat percentage 11.9 ± 4.1 %, climbing skill 18.9 ± 4.0 IRCRA scale) performed climbing specific grip tests measuring isometric strength (peak force, rate of force development and maximal voluntary contraction (and dynamic strength (power and peak velocity in pull-up) on a 23-mm campus rung. Further, an intermittent finger endurance (7 seconds work, 3 seconds rest at 60% of maximal voluntary contraction) test to failure was conducted. All tests were performed on two separate occasions (separated by 2–5 days) with and without blood flow restriction (200 mmHg) in a randomized order. The results demonstrated no differences in the isometric strength tests (p  = 0.496–0.850, ES = 0.060–0.170), dynamic strength test (p  = 0.226–0.442, ES = 0.200–0.330) or the intermittent finger endurance test (p  = 0.563, ES = 0.160). In conclusion, no differences were observed in the maximal isometric pull-up test, dynamic pull-up test or finger endurance tests including measurements as peak force, MVC, RFD, power output, peak velocity or time to fatigue at 60% of MVC with and without BFR.","PeriodicalId":52082,"journal":{"name":"Movement and Sports Sciences - Science et Motricite","volume":"1 1","pages":"7-14"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1051/sm/2020004","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The effects of acute blood flow restriction on climbing-specific tests\",\"authors\":\"A. Saeterbakken, V. Andersen, N. Stien, Helene Pedersen, T. E. Solstad, M. Shaw, Mari Hårstad Meslo, A. Wergeland, Vegard Vereide, Espen Hermans\",\"doi\":\"10.1051/sm/2020004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The aim of the study was to compare climbing specific performance tests with and without blood flow restriction (BFR). Thirty one climbers (age 26.9 ± 5.5 years, height 177.2 ± 7.5 cm, weight 70.5 ± 8.3 kg, fat percentage 11.9 ± 4.1 %, climbing skill 18.9 ± 4.0 IRCRA scale) performed climbing specific grip tests measuring isometric strength (peak force, rate of force development and maximal voluntary contraction (and dynamic strength (power and peak velocity in pull-up) on a 23-mm campus rung. Further, an intermittent finger endurance (7 seconds work, 3 seconds rest at 60% of maximal voluntary contraction) test to failure was conducted. All tests were performed on two separate occasions (separated by 2–5 days) with and without blood flow restriction (200 mmHg) in a randomized order. The results demonstrated no differences in the isometric strength tests (p  = 0.496–0.850, ES = 0.060–0.170), dynamic strength test (p  = 0.226–0.442, ES = 0.200–0.330) or the intermittent finger endurance test (p  = 0.563, ES = 0.160). In conclusion, no differences were observed in the maximal isometric pull-up test, dynamic pull-up test or finger endurance tests including measurements as peak force, MVC, RFD, power output, peak velocity or time to fatigue at 60% of MVC with and without BFR.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52082,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Movement and Sports Sciences - Science et Motricite\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"7-14\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1051/sm/2020004\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Movement and Sports Sciences - Science et Motricite\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1051/sm/2020004\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Movement and Sports Sciences - Science et Motricite","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1051/sm/2020004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

本研究的目的是比较有和没有血流量限制(BFR)的攀爬特定性能测试。31名攀岩者(年龄26.9±5.5岁,身高177.2±7.5 cm,体重70.5±8.3 kg,脂肪率11.9±4.1%,攀爬技能18.9±4.0 IRCRA量表)在23毫米校园台阶上进行攀爬专项握力测试,测量等长强度(峰值力、力发展率和最大自主收缩率)和动态强度(力和引体向上的峰值速度)。此外,进行了间歇性手指耐力(7秒工作,3秒休息,最大自愿收缩的60%)测试,直到失败。所有测试在两个不同的场合进行(间隔2-5天),有和没有血流限制(200 mmHg),按随机顺序进行。结果显示,等长强度试验(p = 0.496 ~ 0.850, ES = 0.060 ~ 0.170)、动态强度试验(p = 0.226 ~ 0.442, ES = 0.200 ~ 0.330)和手指间歇耐力试验(p = 0.563, ES = 0.160)无显著差异。总之,在最大等距引体向上测试、动态引体向上测试或手指耐力测试中,包括峰值力、MVC、RFD、功率输出、峰值速度或60% MVC时的疲劳时间,在有和没有BFR的情况下,没有观察到差异。
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 acute blood flow restriction on climbing-specific tests
The aim of the study was to compare climbing specific performance tests with and without blood flow restriction (BFR). Thirty one climbers (age 26.9 ± 5.5 years, height 177.2 ± 7.5 cm, weight 70.5 ± 8.3 kg, fat percentage 11.9 ± 4.1 %, climbing skill 18.9 ± 4.0 IRCRA scale) performed climbing specific grip tests measuring isometric strength (peak force, rate of force development and maximal voluntary contraction (and dynamic strength (power and peak velocity in pull-up) on a 23-mm campus rung. Further, an intermittent finger endurance (7 seconds work, 3 seconds rest at 60% of maximal voluntary contraction) test to failure was conducted. All tests were performed on two separate occasions (separated by 2–5 days) with and without blood flow restriction (200 mmHg) in a randomized order. The results demonstrated no differences in the isometric strength tests (p  = 0.496–0.850, ES = 0.060–0.170), dynamic strength test (p  = 0.226–0.442, ES = 0.200–0.330) or the intermittent finger endurance test (p  = 0.563, ES = 0.160). In conclusion, no differences were observed in the maximal isometric pull-up test, dynamic pull-up test or finger endurance tests including measurements as peak force, MVC, RFD, power output, peak velocity or time to fatigue at 60% of MVC with and without BFR.
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
Movement and Sports Sciences - Science et Motricite
Movement and Sports Sciences - Science et Motricite Social Sciences-Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
期刊介绍: Movement & Sport Sciences - Science & Motricité is a peer-reviewed journal published on behalf of the French Association of Sport and Exercise Sciences (ACAPS). The journal publishes scientific articles related to human movement, physical activity, rehabilitation, sport and performance in a multidisciplinary perspective. All scientific disciplines are represented: physiology, biomecanics, neuroscience, motor control, psychology, sociology, management, history, epistemology. Fundamental, empirical and more applied or technological approaches are welcome.
×
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