School of Health Sciences, Liverpool Hope University, Liverpool, UK.
Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2014 Sep;9(5):791-7. doi: 10.1123/ijspp.2013-0327. Epub 2013 Dec 11.
To investigate the use of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) during acute recovery between 2 bouts of maximal aerobic exercise.
On 3 separate days, 19 trained male cyclists (28 ± 7 y, 76.4 ± 10.4 kg, power output at maximal aerobic power [pVo2max] 417 ± 44 W) performed a 3-min maximal cycling bout at 105% PVo2max before a 30-min randomly assigned recovery intervention of passive (PAS: resting), active (ACT: 30% PVo2max), or NMES (5 Hz, 4 pulses at 500 μs). Immediately afterward, a cycle bout at 95% PVo2max to exhaustion (TLIM) was performed. Heart rate (HR) and blood lactate (BLa) were recorded at designated time points. Data were analyzed using repeated-measures ANOVA with a Tukey honestly significantly different post hoc test. Statistical significance threshold was P < .05.
The TLIM was significantly shorter for NMES than for ACT (199.6 ± 69.4 s vs 250.7 ± 105.5 s: P = .016) but not PAS recovery (199.6 ± 69.4 s vs 216.4 ± 77.5 s: P = .157). The TLIM was not significantly different between ACT and PAS (250.7 ± 105.5 s vs 216.4 ± 77.5 s: P = .088). The decline in BLa was significantly greater during ACT than NMES and PAS recovery (P < .001), with no difference between NMES and PAS. In addition, HR was significantly higher during ACT than NMES and PAS recovery (P < .001), with no difference between NMES and PAS.
NMES was less effective than ACT and comparable to PAS recovery when used between 2 bouts of maximal aerobic exercise in trained male cyclists.
研究在两次最大有氧运动之间的急性恢复期使用神经肌肉电刺激(NMES)。
在 3 个不同的日子里,19 名训练有素的男性自行车手(28±7 岁,76.4±10.4kg,最大功率输出在最大有氧功率[pVo2max]417±44W)在 105%pVo2max 下进行 3 分钟的最大自行车冲刺,然后进行 30 分钟的随机分配恢复干预,包括被动(PAS:休息)、主动(ACT:30%pVo2max)或 NMES(5Hz,4 个脉冲为 500μs)。之后立即进行 95%pVo2max 至力竭的自行车冲刺(TLIM)。在指定的时间点记录心率(HR)和血乳酸(BLa)。使用重复测量方差分析和 Tukey Honestly 显著不同的事后检验分析数据。统计显著性阈值为 P<0.05。
与 ACT 相比,NMES 的 TLIM 明显缩短(199.6±69.4s 比 250.7±105.5s:P=0.016),但与 PAS 恢复无关(199.6±69.4s 比 216.4±77.5s:P=0.157)。ACT 和 PAS 之间的 TLIM 没有显著差异(250.7±105.5s 比 216.4±77.5s:P=0.088)。与 NMES 和 PAS 恢复相比,ACT 期间 BLa 的下降明显更大(P<0.001),而 NMES 和 PAS 之间没有差异。此外,与 NMES 和 PAS 恢复相比,ACT 期间 HR 明显更高(P<0.001),而 NMES 和 PAS 之间没有差异。
在训练有素的男性自行车手两次最大有氧运动之间使用 NMES 时,其效果不如 ACT 和 PAS 恢复。