Suppr超能文献

六种热身方案对短跑和跳跃表现的影响。

Effects of six warm-up protocols on sprint and jump performance.

作者信息

Vetter Rheba E

机构信息

Health, Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance Department, Northwest Missouri State University, Maryville, Missouri 64468, USA.

出版信息

J Strength Cond Res. 2007 Aug;21(3):819-23. doi: 10.1519/R-20296.1.

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of 6 warm-up protocols, with and without stretches, on 2 different power maneuvers: a 30-m sprint run and a vertical countermovement jump (CJ). The 6 protocols were: (a) walk plus run (WR); (b) WR plus exercises including small jumps (EJ); (c) WR plus dynamic active stretch plus exercises with small jumps (DAEJ); (d) WR plus dynamic active stretch (DA); (e) WR plus static stretch plus exercises with small jumps (SSEJ); and (f) WR plus static stretch (SS). Twenty-six college-age men (n = 14) and women (n = 12) performed each of 6 randomly ordered exercise routines prior to randomly ordered sprint and vertical jump field tests; each routine and subsequent tests were performed on separate days. A 2 x 6 repeated measures analysis of variance revealed a significant overall linear trend (p < or = 0.05) with a general tendency toward reduction in jump height when examined in the following analysis entry order: WR, EJ, DAEJ, DA, SSEJ, and SS. The post hoc analysis pairwise comparisons showed the WR protocol produced higher jumps than did SS (p = 0.003 < or = 0.05), and DAEJ produced higher jumps than did SS (p = 0.009 < or = 0.05). There were no significant differences among the 6 protocols on sprint run performance (p > or = 0.05). No significant interaction occurred between gender and protocol. There were significant differences between men and women on CJ and sprint trials; as expected, in general men ran faster and jumped higher than the women did. The data indicate that a warm-up including static stretching may negatively impact jump performance, but not sprint time.

摘要

本研究的目的是比较6种热身方案(有或无拉伸)对两种不同功率动作的影响:30米短跑和垂直反向纵跳(CJ)。这6种方案分别是:(a)步行加跑步(WR);(b)WR加包括小跳的练习(EJ);(c)WR加动态主动拉伸加小跳练习(DAEJ);(d)WR加动态主动拉伸(DA);(e)WR加静态拉伸加小跳练习(SSEJ);以及(f)WR加静态拉伸(SS)。26名大学年龄男性(n = 14)和女性(n = 12)在随机安排的短跑和垂直跳场地测试之前,分别进行了6种随机排序的锻炼程序;每个程序及随后的测试均在不同日期进行。两因素6次重复测量方差分析显示,当按照以下分析条目顺序进行检查时,存在显著的总体线性趋势(p≤0.05),即跳高水平总体上有降低的趋势:WR、EJ、DAEJ、DA、SSEJ和SS。事后分析的成对比较表明,WR方案产生的跳跃高度高于SS方案(p = 0.003≤0.05),DAEJ方案产生的跳跃高度高于SS方案(p = 0.009≤0.05)。6种方案在短跑成绩上没有显著差异(p≥0.05)。性别与方案之间没有显著的交互作用。在CJ和短跑测试中,男性和女性之间存在显著差异;正如预期的那样,总体上男性比女性跑得更快、跳得更高。数据表明,包括静态拉伸的热身可能会对跳跃成绩产生负面影响,但不会影响短跑时间。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验