Carvalho Joana, Mota Jorge, Soares José M
Faculdade de Ciências de Desporto e de Educação Física, Universidade do Porto.
Rev Port Cardiol. 2003 Nov;22(11):1315-30.
The aim of the present study was to evaluate cardiovascular tolerance to two different types of exercise (strength training vs. aerobic training) in healthy elderly subjects. Nineteen healthy elderly subjects aged 65-81 were studied. All the subjects participated in a 6-month combined physical activity program of gymnastics (2 times/week; 50 min.) and strength training (2 times/week; 40-50 min.). The gymnastics sessions consisted of general physical activity that is usually offered to elderly people and included warm-up, aerobic exercises, strength training, some balance and coordination exercises, recreational games and cool-down. The strength training consisted of two sets of 10 to 12 repetitions at 70% of one repetition maximum (1 RM) for "women's double chest"; "leg extension"; "overhead press; "seated leg curl"; "lateral raise"; "leg press" and "abdominal machine". Cardiovascular tolerance was evaluated both by measuring heart rate (HR) continuously (Polar Vantage NV) during the sessions and by measuring systolic (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) with an electronic sphygmomanometer at five different times (baseline, after warm-up, 15-20 min., 30-40 min. and after cool-down). Moreover, in order to measure the response according to the type of exercise, in strength training sessions, SBP and DBP were also evaluated in different machines (legs vs. arms). Comparison between the two different types of exercise (gymnastics vs. strength training) and between different machines was performed by an unpaired Student's t test. The level of significance was set at p < 0.05. The results showed no significant differences in HR, SBP and DBP values between the two training types. Both sessions were performed at appropriate intensity without exaggerated cardiovascular response. In strength training, exercises that involved the legs presented higher rises in SBP and DBP values than those performed with the arms. These data suggest that, if appropriate techniques are used, strength training as well as gymnastics can be performed by healthy older subjects so long as basic rules for exercise in this population are followed. Furthermore, the data indicate a greater cardiovascular hemodynamic response after strength exercises with the legs than with the arms.
本研究的目的是评估健康老年受试者对两种不同类型运动（力量训练与有氧运动）的心血管耐受性。对19名年龄在65 - 81岁的健康老年受试者进行了研究。所有受试者都参加了一个为期6个月的综合体育活动计划，包括体操（每周2次；每次50分钟）和力量训练（每周2次；每次40 - 50分钟）。体操课程包括通常提供给老年人的一般体育活动，包括热身、有氧运动、力量训练、一些平衡和协调练习、娱乐游戏以及放松活动。力量训练包括针对“女子双胸肌”“腿部伸展”“ overhead press（此处可能有误，推测为‘坐姿推举’）”“坐姿腿弯举”“侧平举”“腿举”和“腹部训练器”进行两组，每组10至12次重复，强度为一次重复最大值（1RM）的70%。通过在课程期间连续测量心率（HR）（使用Polar Vantage NV设备）以及使用电子血压计在五个不同时间点（基线、热身之后、15 - 20分钟、30 - 40分钟以及放松之后）测量收缩压（SBP）和舒张压（DBP）来评估心血管耐受性。此外，为了根据运动类型测量反应，在力量训练课程中，还在不同器械（腿部器械与手臂器械）上评估了SBP和DBP。通过非配对学生t检验对两种不同类型的运动（体操与力量训练）以及不同器械之间进行比较。显著性水平设定为p < 0.05。结果显示，两种训练类型在HR、SBP和DBP值方面没有显著差异。两个课程都在适当强度下进行，没有过度的心血管反应。在力量训练中，涉及腿部的练习比使用手臂进行的练习使SBP和DBP值升高得更多。这些数据表明，如果使用适当的技术，只要遵循该人群运动的基本规则，健康的老年受试者可以进行力量训练以及体操运动。此外，数据表明腿部力量训练后的心血管血液动力学反应比手臂力量训练后的反应更大。
