Center for Sport Performance, Human Performance Laboratory, Department of Kinesiology, California State University , Fullerton, CA, USA.
J Sports Sci Med. 2012 Mar 1;11(1):71-6. eCollection 2012.
Previous literature suggests that muscular involvement and biomechanical changes elicit different responses between overground and treadmill training. The objective of this study was to examine the effects of training on two different treadmill designs on the conventional (CR; concentric only) and functional (FR; eccentric to concentric) hamstring and quadriceps strength ratios. Fifteen men and sixteen women were randomly divided into three groups: motorized (MT), non-motorized (NMT) or control (C). Subjects completed pre and post-test isokinetic concentric and eccentric quadriceps and hamstring testing of both legs. Subjects completed 4 weeks of training on their respective treadmills with mileage increasing ½ mile each week, beginning with 2 miles. The C group did not participate in any training. The CR revealed a significant two way interaction of group x time with MT increasing (pre: 0.80 ± 0.09 to post: 0.84 ± 0.09), NMT decreasing (pre: 0.76 ± 0.13 to post: 0.74 ± 0.10), and C showing no change (pre: 0.79 ± 0.10 to post: 0.79 ± 0.09. The FR revealed a significant two way interaction of speed x sex with the FR increasing as speeds increased for men (60 degrees.s(-1): 1.04 ± 0.11; 180 degrees.s(-1): 1.66 ± 0.27; 300 degrees.s(-1): 2.36 ± 0.45) and women (60 degrees.s(-1): 1.05 ± 0.16; 180 degrees.s(-1): 1.90 ± 0.26; 300 degrees.s(-1): 2.75 ± 0.47) but women increased greater relative to men. Training mode elicited a specific change in concentric hamstring and quadriceps strength resulting in specific changes to the CR; however, neither training mode had an effect on eccentric hamstrings nor the FR. Special attention should be given to the mode of endurance training when the goal is to alter the hamstring/quadriceps CR.
Specificity of treadmill training had different effects on concentric strength.Specificity of treadmill training had little or no effect on eccentric strength.Conventional and functional strength ratios may give different results based on training mode.Four weeks is long enough for strength results to be apparent in untrained people.
先前的文献表明,肌肉参与和生物力学变化在地面和跑步机训练之间产生不同的反应。本研究的目的是检查两种不同跑步机设计对常规(CR;仅向心)和功能性(FR;离心至向心)腘绳肌和四头肌力量比的训练效果。15 名男性和 16 名女性被随机分为三组:电动(MT)、非电动(NMT)或对照组(C)。受试者在两条腿上完成了预测试和后测试的等速向心和离心股四头肌和腘绳肌测试。受试者在各自的跑步机上完成了 4 周的训练,每周增加半英里的里程,从 2 英里开始。C 组不参加任何训练。CR 显示出组 x 时间的显著双向交互作用,MT 增加(前:0.80±0.09 至后:0.84±0.09),NMT 减少(前:0.76±0.13 至后:0.74±0.10),C 组没有变化(前:0.79±0.10 至后:0.79±0.09)。FR 显示出速度 x 性别有显著的双向交互作用,随着男性速度的增加,FR 增加(60 度/s:1.04±0.11;180 度/s:1.66±0.27;300 度/s:2.36±0.45)和女性(60 度/s:1.05±0.16;180 度/s:1.90±0.26;300 度/s:2.75±0.47),但女性的增加幅度大于男性。训练模式引起了向心腘绳肌和股四头肌力量的特定变化,从而导致 CR 的特定变化;然而,两种训练模式都没有对离心腘绳肌或 FR 产生影响。当目标是改变腘绳肌/股四头肌 CR 时,应特别注意耐力训练的模式。
跑步机训练的特异性对向心强度有不同的影响。跑步机训练的特异性对离心强度几乎没有影响。基于训练模式,常规和功能性力量比可能会产生不同的结果。对于未经训练的人来说,四周的时间足以明显看出力量的变化。