不同恢复方式对普通大学生运动疲劳恢复效果的研究

发布时间：2018-07-29 20:32

【摘要】：目的:研究普通大学生采用不同形式的恢复手段进行干预,分析运动后主动恢复、电刺激疗法以及自然恢复的影响和效果,为普通人群消除运动性疲劳恢复提供方法和依据。方法:本研究采用自身对照实验设计,将8名受试者分为对照组(CON)、神经肌肉电刺激组(NMES)以及主动恢复组(ACT),分别进行递增负荷力竭的功率自行车运动。为了诱导受试者产生运动性疲劳,每组实验共进行三次自行车运动。第一次运动10min,选择一种恢复方式恢复20min。第二次运动10min,同种方式恢复20min。第三次令受试者运动至力竭,记录最后一次力竭时间作为重要观察指标。在两次恢复过程中主要测量心率、血乳酸、肌氧含量、心泵功能指标、主观疲劳感觉(RPE)和主观疼痛度等指标。结果:对照组、神经肌肉电刺激组和主动恢复组力竭时间分别为624.14±125.38s、725.14±103.03s和749.00±102.20s,主动恢复组明显长于对照组(P0.05);在第二次恢复第15min时,主动恢复组心率为74.88±8.04bpm低于对照组86.13±12.12bpm(P0.05);主动恢复组在第一次和第二次恢复第15min时血乳酸低于对照组均(P0.05);主动恢复组肌氧变化幅度高于对照组分别为40.88±6.85%和22.50±9.02%(P0.01),主动恢复组肌氧恢复效率高于对照组(P0.05);第一次恢复5min时主动恢复心输出量(CO)高于对照组具有非常显著性差异(P0.01),主动恢复组总外周阻力(TPR)低于对照组具有显著性差异(P0.05),主动恢复组心指数(CI)与心功率指数(CPI)与对照组无明显差异;主动恢复组运动后即刻的主观疼痛感觉低于对照组(P0.05),24h后主观疼痛感觉显著低于对照组(P0.01);电刺激组与对照组各指标均无显著性差异。。结论:主动恢复能够增强运动能力,延长运动时间,降低心率,加快清除血液中堆积的乳酸和代谢产物,加快肌氧的恢复效率。电刺激组在恢复疲劳方面没有效果。
[Abstract]:Objective: to study the effects and effects of active recovery, electrical stimulation therapy and natural recovery in general college students with different forms of rehabilitation, so as to provide methods and basis for the general population to eliminate exercise fatigue recovery. Methods: eight subjects were divided into (CON), neuromuscular stimulation group (NMES) and active recovery group (ACT),). In order to induce exercise-induced fatigue, each group underwent three cycling exercises. After the first exercise for 10 min, choose a recovery method for 20 min. The second exercise lasted 10 minutes and recovered 20 minutes in the same way. The last exhaustion time was recorded as an important observation index. Heart rate, blood lactic acid, muscle oxygen content, cardiac pump function, subjective fatigue sensation (RPE) and subjective pain degree were measured during two recoveries. Results: the exhaustion time of the control group, neuromuscular electrical stimulation group and active recovery group were 624.14 卤125.38s (725.14 卤103.03s) and 749.00 卤102.20s, respectively. The active recovery group was significantly longer than the control group (P0.05). The heart rate of the active recovery group was 74.88 卤8.04bpm lower than that of the control group 86.13 卤12.12bpm (P0.05), the blood lactic acid of the active recovery group was lower than that of the control group at the first and the second 15min recovery (P0.05), and the change of muscle oxygen in the active recovery group was higher than that in the control group (40.88 卤6.85% and 22.50 卤9.02%, respectively, P 0.05), and that in the active recovery group was 22.50 卤9.02% (P0.01). The recovery efficiency of muscle oxygen was higher than that of the control group (P0.05), and the (CO) of the first recovery of 5min was significantly higher than that of the control group (P0.01). The total peripheral resistance (TPR) of the active recovery group was significantly lower than that of the control group (P0.05). There was no significant difference in cardiac index (CI) and cardiac power index (CPI) between complex group and control group. The subjective pain sensation in the active recovery group was significantly lower than that in the control group (P0.05) 24 hours after exercise (P0.01); there was no significant difference between the electrical stimulation group and the control group. Conclusion: active recovery can enhance exercise ability, prolong exercise time, decrease heart rate, speed up the removal of lactic acid and metabolites accumulated in blood, and accelerate the recovery efficiency of muscle oxygen. The electrical stimulation group had no effect on recovery of fatigue.
【学位授予单位】：首都体育学院
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：G804.7

【参考文献】