University of São Paulo, Brazil.
Int J Sports Med. 2011 Feb;32(2):122-5. doi: 10.1055/s-0030-1268007. Epub 2010 Nov 25.
This study compared measurements of upper body aerobic fitness in elite (EC; n=7) and intermediate rock climbers (IC; n=7), and a control group (C; n=7). Subjects underwent an upper limb incremental test on hand cycle ergometer, with increments of 23 W · min(-1), until exhaustion. Ventilation (VE) data were smoothed to 10 s averages and plotted against time for the visual determination of the first (VT1) and second (VT2) ventilatory thresholds. Peak power output was not different among groups [EC=130.9 (±11.8) W; IC=122.1 (±28.4) W; C=115.4 (±15.1) W], but time to exhaustion was significantly higher in EC than IC and C. VO(2 PEAK) was significantly higher in EC [36.8 (±5.7) mL.kg(-1).min(-1)] and IC [35.5 (±5.2) mL.kg(-1).min(-1)] than C [28.8 (±5.0) mL.kg(-1).min(-1)], but there was no difference between EC and IC. VT1 was significantly higher in EC than C [EC=69.0 (±9.4) W; IC=62.4 (±13.0) W; C=52.1 (±11.8) W], but no significant difference was observed in VT2 [EC=103.5 (±18.8) W; IC=92.0 (±22.0) W; C=85.6 (±19.7) W]. These results show that elite indoor rock climbers elicit higher aerobic fitness profile than control subjects when measured with an upper body test.
本研究比较了精英组(EC;n=7)和中级攀岩者(IC;n=7)以及对照组(C;n=7)上肢有氧健身的测量值。受试者在手摇曲柄车上进行上肢递增测试,递增 23 W·min(-1),直至力竭。通气(VE)数据平滑至 10 s 平均值,并绘制随时间的变化图,以确定第一(VT1)和第二(VT2)通气阈值。峰值功率输出在各组之间无差异[EC=130.9(±11.8)W;IC=122.1(±28.4)W;C=115.4(±15.1)W],但 EC 组的力竭时间明显长于 IC 组和 C 组。VO(2 PEAK)在 EC [36.8(±5.7)mL.kg(-1).min(-1)]和 IC [35.5(±5.2)mL.kg(-1).min(-1)]中显著高于 C [28.8(±5.0)mL.kg(-1).min(-1)],但 EC 和 IC 之间没有差异。VT1 在 EC 中显著高于 C [EC=69.0(±9.4)W;IC=62.4(±13.0)W;C=52.1(±11.8)W],但 VT2 无显著差异[EC=103.5(±18.8)W;IC=92.0(±22.0)W;C=85.6(±19.7)W]。这些结果表明,与对照组相比,精英室内攀岩者在进行上半身测试时表现出更高的有氧健身水平。