Department of Human Movement Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
J Strength Cond Res. 2013 Jul;27(7):1974-80. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3182752f08.
The purpose of this study was to test whether a long duration of aerobic high-intensity interval training is more effective than shorter intervals at a higher intensity in highly trained endurance athletes. The sample comprised of 12 male and 9 female, national-level, junior cross-country skiers (age, 17.5 ± 0.4 years, maximal oxygen uptake (V[Combining Dot Above]O2max): 67.4 ± 7.7 ml min kg), who performed 8-week baseline and 8-week intervention training periods on dry land. During the intervention period, a short-interval group (SIG, n = 7) added 2 weekly sessions with short duration intervals (2- to 4-minute bouts, total duration of 15-20 minutes), a long-interval group (LIG; n = 7) added 2 weekly sessions with long duration intervals (5- to 10-minute bouts, total duration of 40-45 minutes). The interval sessions were performed with the athletes' maximal sustainable intensity. A control group (CG; n = 7) added 2 weekly sessions with low-intensity endurance training at 65-74% of maximal heart rate. Before and after the intervention period, the skiers were tested for time-trial performance on 12-km roller-ski skating and 7-km hill run. V[Combining Dot Above]O2max and oxygen uptake at the ventilatory threshold (V[Combining Dot Above]O2VT) were measured during treadmill running. After the intervention training period, the LIG-improved 12-km roller ski, 7-km hill run, V[Combining Dot Above]O2max, and V[Combining Dot Above]O2VT by 6.8 ± 4.0%, 4.8 ± 2.6%, 3.7 ± 1.6%, and 5.8 ± 3.3%, respectively, from pre- to posttesting, and improved both performance tests and V[Combining Dot Above]O2VT when compared with the SIG and the CG (all p < 0.05). The SIG improved V[Combining Dot Above]O2max by 3.5 ± 3.2% from pre- to posttesting (p < 0.05), whereas the CG remained unchanged. As hypothesized, a long duration of aerobic high-intensity interval training improved endurance performance and oxygen uptake at the ventilatory threshold more than shorter intervals at a higher intensity.
本研究旨在测试在高训练水平的耐力运动员中,长时间的有氧高强度间歇训练是否比短时间、高强度的间歇训练更有效。研究对象为 12 名男性和 9 名女性国家一级青少年越野滑雪运动员(年龄 17.5 ± 0.4 岁,最大摄氧量(V[Combining Dot Above]O2max):67.4 ± 7.7 ml min kg),他们在陆地上进行了 8 周的基础训练和 8 周的干预训练。在干预期间,短时间间隔组(SIG,n = 7)增加了 2 次每周短时间间隔训练(2-4 分钟,总时长 15-20 分钟),长时间间隔组(LIG;n = 7)增加了 2 次每周长时间间隔训练(5-10 分钟,总时长 40-45 分钟)。间歇训练的强度为运动员的最大可持续强度。对照组(CG;n = 7)增加了 2 次每周低强度耐力训练,强度为最大心率的 65-74%。干预前后,滑雪运动员进行了 12 公里轮滑和 7 公里爬坡计时赛测试,在跑步机上测量最大摄氧量(V[Combining Dot Above]O2max)和通气阈下的摄氧量(V[Combining Dot Above]O2VT)。干预训练后,LIG 组在 12 公里轮滑、7 公里爬坡、V[Combining Dot Above]O2max 和 V[Combining Dot Above]O2VT 方面分别提高了 6.8 ± 4.0%、4.8 ± 2.6%、3.7 ± 1.6%和 5.8 ± 3.3%,与 SIG 和 CG 相比,这两个表现测试和 V[Combining Dot Above]O2VT 都有所提高(均 p < 0.05)。SIG 组的 V[Combining Dot Above]O2max 在预测试到后测试期间提高了 3.5 ± 3.2%(p < 0.05),而 CG 组则保持不变。正如假设的那样,长时间的有氧高强度间歇训练比短时间、高强度的间歇训练更能提高耐力表现和通气阈下的摄氧量。