Department of Health, Exercise Science, and Recreation Management, University of Mississippi, Oxford, Mississippi, USA.
J Strength Cond Res. 2011 Jul;25(7):1839-48. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181e7ffad.
The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of a 6-week, periodized squat training program, with or without whole-body low-frequency vibration (WBLFV), applied before and between sets to 1RM squat strength and body composition. Thirty men aged between 20 and 30 years with at least 6 months of recreational weight training experience completed the study. Subjects were randomly assigned to either 1 of 2 training groups or to an active control group (CON). Group 1 (CON; n = 6) did not participate in the training protocol but participated only in testing sessions. Group 2 (SQTV, n = 13) performed 6 weeks of squat training while receiving WBLFV (50 Hz), before, and in-between sets. The third group (SQT, n = 11) performed 6 weeks of squat training only. Subjects completed 12 workouts with variable loads (55-90% one repetition maximum [1RM]) and sets (), performing squats twice weekly separated by 72 hours. The RM measures were recorded on weeks (W) 1, 3, and 7. During the second workout of a week, the load was reduced by 10-15%, with "speed squats" performed during the final 3 weeks. Rest periods in between sets were set at 240 seconds. The WBLFV was applied while subjects stood on a WBLFV platform holding an isometric quarter squat position (knee angle 135 ± 5°). Initially, WBLFV was applied at 50 Hz for 30 seconds at low amplitude (peak-peak 2-4 mm). A rest period of 180 seconds followed WBLFV exposure before the first set of squats. The WBLFV was then applied intermittently (3 × 10 seconds) at 50 Hz, high amplitude (peak-peak, 4-6 mm) at time points, 60, 120, and 180 seconds into the 240-second rest period. Total body dual x-ray absorptiometry scans were performed at W0 (week before training) and W7 (week after training). Measures recorded included total body mass (kg), total body lean mass (TLBM, kg), trunk lean mass (kg), leg lean mass (kg), total body fat percentage, trunk fat percentage, and leg fat percentage (LF%). Repeated-measures analysis of variance and analysis of covariance revealed 1RM increased significantly between W1-W3, W3-W7, and W1-W7 for both experimental groups but not for control (p = 0.001, effect size [ES] = 0.237, 1 - β = 0.947). No significant differences were seen for %Δ (p > 0.05). Significant group by trial and group effects were seen for TLBM, SQTV > CON at W7 (p = 0.044). A significant main effect for time was seen for LF%, W0 vs. W7 (p = 0.047). No other significant differences were seen (p > 0.05). "Practical trends" were seen favoring "short-term" neuromuscular adaptations for the SQTV group during the first 3 weeks (p = 0.10, ES = 0.157, 1 - β = 0.443, mean diff; SQTV week 3 4.72 kg > CON and 2.53 kg > SQT). Differences in motor unit activation patterns, hypertrophic responses, and dietary intake during the training period could account for the trends seen.
本研究的目的是检验 6 周周期性深蹲训练方案对 1RM 深蹲力量和身体成分的影响,该方案在每组训练前后应用全身低频振动(WBLFV),每周进行 2 次。30 名年龄在 20 岁至 30 岁之间、有至少 6 个月娱乐性举重训练经验的男性完成了这项研究。受试者被随机分配到 2 个训练组或 1 个主动对照组(CON)之一。第 1 组(CON;n=6)没有参加训练方案,但只参加了测试会议。第 2 组(SQTV,n=13)在接受 WBLFV(50Hz)前和中间进行 6 周深蹲训练。第三组(SQT,n=11)仅进行 6 周的深蹲训练。受试者每周完成 12 次不同负荷(55-90%1RM)和次数的训练(),每周进行两次深蹲训练,间隔 72 小时。1RM 测量值在第 1、3 和 7 周记录。在一周的第二次锻炼中,负荷减少 10-15%,在最后 3 周进行“速度深蹲”。每组之间的休息时间设定为 240 秒。受试者站在 WBLFV 平台上,保持等长四分之一深蹲姿势(膝关节角度 135±5°),同时接受 WBLFV。最初,WBLFV 以 50Hz 的频率应用 30 秒,低幅度(峰峰值 2-4mm)。第一次深蹲前休息 180 秒。然后,WBLFV 在 240 秒休息期间以 50Hz 的频率间歇性应用(3×10 秒),在 60、120 和 180 秒时应用高幅度(峰峰值,4-6mm)。在 W0(训练前一周)和 W7(训练后一周)进行全身双能 X 射线吸收法扫描。记录的测量值包括总体质量(kg)、总体瘦体重(TLBM,kg)、躯干瘦体重(kg)、腿部瘦体重(kg)、总体体脂百分比、躯干体脂百分比和腿部体脂百分比(LF%)。重复测量方差分析和协方差分析显示,实验组的 1RM 在 W1-W3、W3-W7 和 W1-W7 之间均显著增加,但对照组没有(p=0.001,效应大小[ES]=0.237,1-β=0.947)。%Δ 没有显著差异(p>0.05)。在 TLBM 和 SQTV 中观察到显著的组间试验和组间效应>CON 在 W7 时(p=0.044)。LF%在 W0 与 W7 之间存在显著的时间主效应(p=0.047)。没有观察到其他显著差异(p>0.05)。在第 3 周之前,SQTV 组出现了“短期”神经肌肉适应的“实用趋势”(p=0.10,ES=0.157,1-β=0.443,均值差异;SQTV 第 3 周 4.72kg>CON 和 2.53kg>SQT)。在训练期间,运动单位激活模式、肥大反应和饮食摄入的差异可能导致了这些趋势的出现。