大强度间歇训练与中等强度持续训练对耗氧量动力学特征影响的比较研究

发布时间：2018-03-04 23:12

本文选题：间歇训练　切入点：持续训练　出处：《体育科学》2017年03期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：目的:比较大强度间歇训练(High-intensity Interval Training,HIT)和中等强度持续训练(Moderate-intensity Continuous Training,MCT)对斜坡测试(Ramp)、中等强度及高强度持续运动中耗氧量动力学(OUK,Oxygen Uptake Kinetics)等参数的影响。方法:36名青年男性受试者分为高强度间歇训练组(HIT)、中等强度持续训练组(MCT,)和对照组(NOT),MCT和HIT两干预组分别进行6周、每周3次强度不同而训练量相同的运动干预;各组干预前(Pre)、中(Mid)、后(Post)分别进行Ramp力竭测试及中、高强度持续运动的OUK测试。结果:6周干预后,HIT与MCT两干预组VO_2max/kg(最大耗氧量)、VO_2-VAT(通气无氧阈耗氧量)、VO_2/kg-VAT(通气无氧阈耗氧量相对值)、Waat-VAT(通气无氧阈功率)均表现为干预后值高于干预前(P0.05)、干预中值(P0.01);3组受试者之间上述参数组间差异显著(P0.05),但仅表现HIT、MCT组与NOT组之间差异显著,HIT与MCT两组之间差异不显著(P0.05);A_(slop)(Delta效率)、A_(OUES)(耗氧效率坡度)组间效应不显著(P0.05)。中等强度下OUK各参数仅有τ(Tau,OUK时间常数)值组间效应显著(F=3.652,P=0.040.05),HIT与MCT两干预组分别与NOT之间组间效应显著(HIT vs NOT,P=0.0270.05;MCT vs NOT,P=0.0270.05),但HIT、MCT两干预组Mid、Post阶段,组间差异不显著(P0.05),各组各时间点TD值、A值组间差异不显著(P0.05)。大强度运动时A1(A,耗氧幅度)值组间效应显著(F=4.439,P=0.0110.05),除了MCT及HIT分别与NOT组组间差异显著外,HIT与MCT之间差异显著(P0.05),6周后HIT组A1值显著高于同阶段MCT组(1 893.9±132.1vs 1 632.3±340.0,P0.05);而对于观测值τ_1,3组受试者之间组间效应显著(F=9.083,P0.01),MIT及HIT组和NOT组相比,τ_1显著降低,并且MIT和HIT组间差异显著(P0.05);3周后HIT组τ_1值已经显著高于NOT组(Mid:42.5±3.8 vs 53.7±4.3,P0.01),而MCT在6周后出现(Post:43.1±4.6 vs 53.4±6.0,P0.01)。3周后HIT组A2值比NOT组显著减低(P0.05),6周后Post值显著低于MCT组及NOT组同阶段值(P0.01),而MCT组在各阶段与NOT组之间差异不显著(P0.05)。τ_2虽有所升高,但并无显著意义(P0.05)。结论:大强度间歇训练和中等强度持续训练均可提高VO_2max、VAT等心肺耐力评定参数,但两种训练模式对上述参数改善并无显著区别;两训练模式对中等强度下耗氧动力参数影响无显著区别,但大强度间歇训练在提高大强度运动过程中氧耗应答速率及减少耗氧量慢成分方面有着更明显的优势。
[Abstract]:Objective: to compare the effects of high intensity Interval training with high intensity interval training and moderate intensity continuous training moderate-intensity Continuous training on the parameters of slope test, oxygen consumption dynamics in medium intensity and high intensity continuous exercise. Methods: 36 young men were employed in this study. The subjects were divided into two groups: the high intensity intermittent training group, the moderate intensity continuous training group and the control group for 6 weeks, respectively. Exercise intervention with different intensity and same amount of training was conducted three times a week. Ramp exhaustion tests were performed before and after intervention in each group. OUK test of high intensity continuous exercise. Results after 6 weeks of intervention, the two intervention groups, hit and MCT, had 2max / kg VAT (maximal oxygen consumption / VAT / VAT / VAT / VAT = 2 / kg / kg / VAT.Results the relative value of VAT (relative value of anaerobic threshold oxygen consumption / VAT) was shown as the value after intervention (VAT). It was higher than that before intervention (P 0.05). The difference of the above parameters among the three groups was significant (P 0.05), but only the difference between HITMCT group and NOT group was not significant. There was no significant difference between Hit and MCT group and there was no significant difference between the two groups. Under moderate intensity, the OUK parameters were only 蟿 Taut OUK time constant. The effect between the two intervention groups was significant. The effect between the two intervention groups and NOT was significant, and the effect was significant between the two intervention groups and NOT, but the midpost phase of the two intervention groups was Hit and not P0. 027. 05 MCT vs nitrite P0. 027 0. 05, but the midpost phase of the two intervention groups with HITT MCT was significantly higher than that of the other two intervention groups (P < 0. 05 or 0. 05%), but there was no significant difference in the midpost phase between the two intervention groups, and the difference between the two intervention groups was observed. There was no significant difference among groups (P 0.05), but there was no significant difference in TD value and A value among groups at different time points. There was a significant difference between group A and MCT in high intensity exercise. There was a significant difference between MCT and MCT in addition to the difference between NOT and MCT. After 6 weeks, the A1 value of HIT group was significantly higher than that of MCT group at the same stage (1 893.9 卤132.1 vs 1 632.3 卤340.0 P0.05), while 蟿 1 was significantly lower than that of HIT group and NOT group. After 3 weeks, the 蟿 1 value of HIT group was significantly higher than that of NOT group mid: 42.5 卤3.8 vs 53.7 卤4.3 P0.01a, while the A2 value of HIT group was significantly lower than that of NOT group after 6 weeks. The Post value of HIT group was significantly lower than that of MCT group and NOT group at the same stage. However, there was no significant difference between MCT group and NOT group. Conclusion: both high-intensity intermittent training and moderate intensity continuous training can improve cardiopulmonary endurance assessment parameters such as VO _ 2max.VAT, but there is no significant difference between the two training modes in improving the above parameters. There is no significant difference between the two training modes on the dynamic parameters of oxygen consumption at moderate intensity, but the intermittent training with high intensity has more obvious advantages in increasing the response rate of oxygen consumption and reducing the slow component of oxygen consumption in the process of high intensity exercise.
【作者单位】：华侨大学体育学院;华侨大学体育与健康科学研究中心;北京第二外国语学院体育部;国家体育总局秦皇岛训练基地;
【基金】：华侨大学中央高校基本科研业务费资助项目(13SKGCQT14) 国家体育总局重点研究领域攻关课题(2012B067)
【分类号】：G808.1

【参考文献】