• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

在倾斜行走过程中使用和不使用登山杖时的负重行走能量消耗。

Load carriage energy expenditure with and without hiking poles during inclined walking.

作者信息

Jacobson B H, Wright T, Dugan B

机构信息

Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, USA.

出版信息

Int J Sports Med. 2000 Jul;21(5):356-9. doi: 10.1055/s-2000-3775.

DOI:10.1055/s-2000-3775
PMID:10950445
Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare load carriage energy expenditure with and without using hiking poles. Twenty male volunteers aged 20-48yr (Mean=29.8yr) completed two randomly ordered submaximal treadmill trials with poles (E) and without poles (C). Poles and load (15 kg backpack) were fitted for each subject according to the manufacturers' suggestions. Heart rates (HR), minute ventilation (V(E)), oxygen consumption (O2), caloric expenditure (Kcal), and rating of perceived exertion (RPE) were recorded at the end of each minute. Two trials separated by one week consisted of a constant treadmill speed of 1.5 mph and 1 min at 10% grade, 2 min at 15% grade, 2 min at 20% grade, and 10 min. at 25% grade. Mean HR (E = 144.8 +/- 24.4 b x min(-1); C = 144.0 +/- 25.7 b x min(-1)) and mean V(E) (E=51.4 +/- 15.8L x min(-1); C=50.8 +/- 17.0L x min(-1)), VO2 (E = 26.9 +/- 6.1 ml x kg(-1) x min(-1); C = 27.4 +/- 6.6 ml x kg(-1) x min(-1)), and Kcal (E = 10.6 +/- 2.9 Kcal x min(-1); C = 10.8 +/- 3.1 Kcal x min(-1)) were not significantly different between the two conditions. RPE (E = 13.28 +/- 1.2; C = 14.56 +/- 1.2) was significantly lower (P < 0.05) with hiking poles. Analysis of paired time points yielded no significant differences in HR, VO2, V(E), and Kcal, however, RPE means were significantly lower for 5 of the last 7 trial minutes with the use of poles. These results suggest that during load carriage on moderate grade, the weight and use of hiking poles does not increase energy expenditure but may provide reduced perceptions of physical exertion.

摘要

本研究的目的是比较使用登山杖与不使用登山杖时负重行走的能量消耗。20名年龄在20 - 48岁(平均 = 29.8岁)的男性志愿者完成了两项随机排序的次最大强度跑步机试验,一次使用登山杖(E组),另一次不使用登山杖(C组)。根据制造商的建议为每位受试者配备登山杖和负重(15千克背包)。在每分钟结束时记录心率(HR)、分钟通气量(V(E))、耗氧量(O2)、热量消耗(千卡)和主观用力程度评分(RPE)。两项试验间隔一周,包括在跑步机上以1.5英里/小时的恒定速度行走,以及在10%坡度下行走1分钟、15%坡度下行走2分钟、20%坡度下行走2分钟和25%坡度下行走10分钟。平均心率(E组 = 144.8 ± 24.4次/分钟;C组 = 144.0 ± 25.7次/分钟)、平均分钟通气量(E组 = 51.4 ± 15.8升/分钟;C组 = 50.8 ± 17.0升/分钟)、耗氧量(E组 = 26.9 ± 6.1毫升/千克/分钟;C组 = 27.4 ± 6.6毫升/千克/分钟)和热量消耗(E组 = 10.6 ± 2.9千卡/分钟;C组 = 10.8 ± 3.1千卡/分钟)在两种情况下无显著差异。使用登山杖时主观用力程度评分(E组 = 13.28 ± 1.2;C组 = 14.56 ± 1.2)显著更低(P < 0.05)。对配对时间点的分析显示,心率、耗氧量、分钟通气量和热量消耗无显著差异,然而,在试验的最后7分钟中有5分钟,使用登山杖时主观用力程度评分均值显著更低。这些结果表明,在中等坡度负重行走期间,登山杖的重量和使用并不会增加能量消耗,但可能会减轻身体用力的感觉。

相似文献

1
Load carriage energy expenditure with and without hiking poles during inclined walking.在倾斜行走过程中使用和不使用登山杖时的负重行走能量消耗。
Int J Sports Med. 2000 Jul;21(5):356-9. doi: 10.1055/s-2000-3775.
2
Energy expenditure during submaximal walking with Exerstriders.使用运动辅助器进行次最大强度步行时的能量消耗。
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1995 Apr;27(4):607-11.
3
Trekking poles increase physiological responses to hiking without increased perceived exertion.徒步杖会增加徒步过程中的生理反应,而不会增加主观疲劳感。
J Strength Cond Res. 2008 Sep;22(5):1468-74. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e31817bd4e8.
4
The physiological responses to walking with and without Power Poles on treadmill exercise.在跑步机上行走时使用和不使用助力杆的生理反应。
Res Q Exerc Sport. 1997 Jun;68(2):161-6. doi: 10.1080/02701367.1997.10607992.
5
Effects of hiking pole inertia on energy and muscular costs during uphill walking.上坡行走时登山杖惯性对能量消耗和肌肉负荷的影响。
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2008 Jun;40(6):1117-25. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e318167228a.
6
Effect of load position on physiological and perceptual responses during load carriage with an internal frame backpack.背负内架式背包负重行走时,负重位置对生理和感知反应的影响。
Ergonomics. 2004 Jun 10;47(7):784-9. doi: 10.1080/0014013042000193264.
7
Effects of hiking downhill using trekking poles while carrying external loads.背负外部负载时使用登山杖下坡徒步的效果。
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2007 Jan;39(1):177-83. doi: 10.1249/01.mss.0000240328.31276.fc.
8
Exertion during uphill, level and downhill walking with and without hiking poles.在有和没有登山杖的情况下,在上坡、平地和下坡行走时的用力情况。
J Sports Sci Med. 2008 Mar 1;7(1):32-8. eCollection 2008.
9
Energy costs of walking on a dual-action treadmill in men and women.男性和女性在双动跑步机上行走的能量消耗。
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1995 Jan;27(1):121-5.
10
Effects of load carriage, load position, and walking speed on energy cost of walking.负荷携带、负荷位置和步行速度对步行能量消耗的影响。
Appl Ergon. 2004 Jul;35(4):329-35. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2004.03.008.

引用本文的文献

1
Effects of Backpack Load and Trekking Poles on Energy Expenditure During Field Track Walking.背包负重和徒步杖对野外徒步过程中能量消耗的影响。
Sports Med Int Open. 2018 Sep 6;2(4):E117-E122. doi: 10.1055/a-0637-8719. eCollection 2018 Jul.
2
Exertion during uphill, level and downhill walking with and without hiking poles.在有和没有登山杖的情况下,在上坡、平地和下坡行走时的用力情况。
J Sports Sci Med. 2008 Mar 1;7(1):32-8. eCollection 2008.
3
Oxygen uptake, heart rate, perceived exertion, and integrated electromyogram of the lower and upper extremities during level and Nordic walking on a treadmill.
在跑步机上进行水平和北欧式行走时,下肢和上肢的摄氧量、心率、感知用力和综合肌电图。
J Physiol Anthropol. 2013 Feb 13;32(1):2. doi: 10.1186/1880-6805-32-2.
4
Physiological and perceptual responses to Nordic walking in obese middle-aged women in comparison with the normal walk.与正常步行相比,肥胖中年女性进行北欧式行走时的生理和感知反应。
Eur J Appl Physiol. 2010 Apr;108(6):1141-51. doi: 10.1007/s00421-009-1315-z. Epub 2009 Dec 20.
5
Physiological and metabolic aspects of very prolonged exercise with particular reference to hill walking.长时间运动的生理和代谢方面,特别是关于爬山运动
Sports Med. 2005;35(7):619-47. doi: 10.2165/00007256-200535070-00006.