Buchheit Martin, Al Haddad Hani, Millet Grégoire Paul, Lepretre Pierre Marie, Newton Michael, Ahmaidi Said
Faculty of Sport Sciences, Laboratory of Exercise Physiology and Rehabilitation, University of Picardie Jules Verne, Amiens, France.
J Strength Cond Res. 2009 Jan;23(1):93-100. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e31818b9721.
The 30-15 Intermittent Fitness Test (30-15IFT) is an attractive alternative to classic continuous incremental field tests for defining a reference velocity for interval training prescription in team sport athletes. The aim of the present study was to compare cardiorespiratory and autonomic responses to 30-15IFT with those observed during a standard continuous test (CT). In 20 team sport players (20.9 +/- 2.2 years), cardiopulmonary parameters were measured during exercise and for 10 minutes after both tests. Final running velocity, peak lactate ([La]peak), and rating of perceived exertion (RPE) were also measured. Parasympathetic function was assessed during the postexercise recovery phase via heart rate (HR) recovery time constant (HRR[tau]) and HR variability (HRV) vagal-related indices. At exhaustion, no difference was observed in peak oxygen uptake VO2peak), respiratory exchange ratio, HR, or RPE between 30-15IFT and CT. In contrast, 30-15IFT led to significantly higher minute ventilation, [La]peak, and final velocity than CT (p < 0.05 for all parameters). All maximal cardiorespiratory variables observed during both tests were moderately to well correlated (e.g., r = 0.76, p = 0.001 for [latin capital VO2peak). Regarding ventilatory thresholds (VThs), all cardiorespiratory measurements were similar and well correlated between the 2 tests. Parasympathetic function was lower after 30-15IFT than after CT, as indicated by significantly longer HHR[tau] (81.9 +/- 18.2 vs. 60.5 +/- 19.5 for 30-15IFT and CT, respectively, p < 0.001) and lower HRV vagal-related indices (i.e., the root mean square of successive R-R intervals differences [rMSSD]: 4.1 +/- 2.4 and 7.0 +/- 4.9 milliseconds, p < 0.05). In conclusion, the 30-15IFT is accurate for assessing VThs and VO2peak, but it alters postexercise parasympathetic function more than a continuous incremental protocol.
30-15间歇体能测试（30-15IFT）是一种颇具吸引力的替代方法，可用于替代传统的连续递增性场地测试，以确定团队运动运动员间歇训练处方的参考速度。本研究的目的是比较30-15IFT与标准连续测试（CT）期间观察到的心肺和自主神经反应。在20名团队运动运动员（20.9±2.2岁）中，在运动期间以及两项测试后的10分钟内测量心肺参数。还测量了最终跑步速度、血乳酸峰值（[La]peak）和主观用力程度分级（RPE）。在运动后恢复阶段，通过心率（HR）恢复时间常数（HRR[tau]）和HR变异性（HRV）迷走神经相关指标评估副交感神经功能。在力竭时，30-15IFT和CT之间的最大摄氧量峰值（VO2peak）、呼吸交换率、HR或RPE均未观察到差异。相比之下，30-15IFT导致的分钟通气量、[La]peak和最终速度显著高于CT（所有参数p<0.05）。两项测试期间观察到的所有最大心肺变量均呈中度至高度相关（例如，[La]peak的r=0.76，p=0.001）。关于通气阈值（VThs），两项测试之间所有心肺测量结果相似且相关性良好。30-15IFT后的副交感神经功能低于CT后，表现为HRR[tau]显著延长（30-15IFT和CT分别为81.9±18.2和60.5±19.5，p<0.001）以及HRV迷走神经相关指标降低（即连续R-R间期差值的均方根[rMSSD]：4.1±2.4和7.0±4.9毫秒，p<0.05）。总之，30-15IFT在评估VThs和VO2peak方面是准确的，但与连续递增方案相比，它对运动后副交感神经功能的影响更大。
