Suppr超能文献

深蹲与箱式深蹲时动力学变量和肌肉活动的比较。

Comparison of kinetic variables and muscle activity during a squat vs. a box squat.

机构信息

Neuromuscular Laboratory, Department of Health, Leisure and Exercise Science, Appalachian State University, Boone, North Carolina, USA.

出版信息

J Strength Cond Res. 2010 Dec;24(12):3195-9. doi: 10.1519/jsc.0b013e3181f6399a.

Abstract

The purpose of this investigation was to determine if there was a difference in kinetic variables and muscle activity when comparing a squat to a box squat. A box squat removes the stretch-shortening cycle component from the squat, and thus, the possible influence of the box squat on concentric phase performance is of interest. Eight resistance trained men (Height: 179.61 ± 13.43 cm; Body Mass: 107.65 ± 29.79 kg; Age: 24.77 ± 3.22 years; 1 repetition maximum [1RM]: 200.11 ± 58.91 kg) performed 1 repetition of squats and box squats using 60, 70, and 80% of their 1RM in a randomized fashion. Subjects completed the movement while standing on a force plate and with 2 linear position transducers attached to the bar. Force and velocity were used to calculate power. Peak force and peak power were determined from the force-time and power-time curves during the concentric phase of the lift. Muscle activity (electromyography) was recorded from the vastus lateralis, vastus medialis, biceps femoris, and longissimus. Results indicate that peak force and peak power are similar between the squat and box squat. However, during the 70% of 1RM trials, the squat resulted in a significantly lower peak force in comparison to the box squat (squat = 3,269 ± 573 N, box squat = 3,364 ± 575 N). In addition, during the 80% of 1RM trials, the squat resulted in significantly lower peak power in comparison to the box squat (squat = 2,050 ± 486 W, box squat = 2,197 ± 544 W). Muscle activity was generally higher during the squat in comparison to the box squat. In conclusion, minimal differences were observed in kinetic variables and muscle activity between the squat and box squat. Removing the stretch-shortening cycle during the squat (using a box) appears to have limited negative consequences on performance.

摘要

本研究旨在确定在比较深蹲和箱式深蹲时,动力学变量和肌肉活动是否存在差异。箱式深蹲消除了深蹲中的伸展-缩短周期成分,因此,箱式深蹲对向心阶段表现的可能影响是值得关注的。八名受过阻力训练的男性(身高:179.61 ± 13.43 厘米;体重:107.65 ± 29.79 千克;年龄:24.77 ± 3.22 岁;1 次最大重复次数 [1RM]:200.11 ± 58.91 千克)以随机的方式使用 60%、70%和 80%的 1RM 进行了一次深蹲和箱式深蹲。受试者在力板上完成动作,并在杠铃上连接了 2 个线性位置传感器。力和速度用于计算功率。在提升的向心阶段,从力-时间和功率-时间曲线中确定峰值力和峰值功率。从股外侧肌、股中间肌、股二头肌和最长肌记录肌肉活动(肌电图)。结果表明,深蹲和箱式深蹲的峰值力和峰值功率相似。然而,在 70%的 1RM 试验中,与箱式深蹲相比,深蹲的峰值力明显较低(深蹲=3269 ± 573 N,箱式深蹲=3364 ± 575 N)。此外,在 80%的 1RM 试验中,与箱式深蹲相比,深蹲的峰值功率明显较低(深蹲=2050 ± 486 W,箱式深蹲=2197 ± 544 W)。与箱式深蹲相比,深蹲时肌肉活动通常更高。总之,在动力学变量和肌肉活动方面,深蹲和箱式深蹲之间观察到的差异很小。在深蹲中(使用箱子)消除伸展-缩短周期似乎对性能没有负面影响。

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