Human Performance Laboratory, São Paulo State University, Av. 24 A, 1515, Bela Vista, Rio Claro, São Paulo, CEP 13506-900, Brazil.
Human Performance Research Group, Center for Health and Sport Sciences, UDESC, Florianópolis, Brazil.
Sports Med. 2017 Mar;47(3):545-554. doi: 10.1007/s40279-016-0604-z.
Several strategies have been used to improve running economy (RE). Defined as the oxygen uptake required at a given submaximal running velocity, it has been considered a key aerobic parameter related to endurance running performance. In this context, concurrent strength and endurance training has been considered an effective method, although conclusions on the optimal concurrent training cannot yet be drawn.
To evaluate the effect of concurrent training on RE in endurance running athletes and identify the effects of subject characteristics and concurrent training variables on the magnitude of RE improvement.
We conducted a computerized search of the PubMed and Web of Science databases, and references of original studies were searched for further relevant studies. The analysis comprised 20 effects in 16 relevant studies published up to August 2015. The outcomes were calculated as the difference in percentage change between control and experimental groups (% change) and data were presented as mean ± 95 % confidence limit. Meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model and, in addition, simple and multiple meta-regression analyses were used to identify effects of age, training status, number of sessions per week, training duration, type of strength training, and neuromuscular performance on % change in RE.
The concurrent training program had a small beneficial effect on RE (% change = -3.93 ± 1.19 %; p < 0.001). In addition, explosive (% change = -4.83 ± 1.53; p < 0.001) and heavy weight (% change = -3.65 ± 2.74; p = 0.009) training programs produced similar improvements in RE, while isometric training (% change = -2.20 ± 4.37; p = 0.324) in selected studies did not induce a significant effect. The multiple linear meta-regression analysis showed that all the differences between % changes could be explained by including the above-mentioned characteristics of subjects and weight training program elements. This model showed that the magnitude of the % change in RE was larger for longer training duration (β = -0.83 ± 0.72, p = 0.02).
Explosive training and heavy weight training are effective concurrent training methods aiming to improve RE within a few weeks. However, long-term training programs seem to be necessary when the largest possible improvement in RE is desired.
已经有多种策略被用于提高跑步经济性(RE)。RE 被定义为在给定亚最大跑步速度下所需的耗氧量,它被认为是与耐力跑步表现相关的关键有氧参数。在这种情况下,力量和耐力的同时训练被认为是一种有效的方法,尽管对于最佳的同时训练方法还不能得出结论。
评估耐力跑步运动员同时训练对 RE 的影响,并确定受试者特征和同时训练变量对 RE 改善幅度的影响。
我们对 PubMed 和 Web of Science 数据库进行了计算机检索,并对原始研究的参考文献进行了搜索,以寻找进一步的相关研究。分析包括截至 2015 年 8 月发表的 16 项相关研究中的 20 项效应。结果以对照组和实验组之间的百分比变化差异(%变化)表示,并以平均值±95%置信限呈现。采用随机效应模型进行荟萃分析,此外,还进行了简单和多元荟萃回归分析,以确定年龄、训练状态、每周训练次数、训练持续时间、力量训练类型和神经肌肉性能对 RE 百分比变化的影响。
同时训练方案对 RE 有较小的有益影响(%变化=-3.93±1.19%;p<0.001)。此外,爆发力(%变化=-4.83±1.53%;p<0.001)和大重量(%变化=-3.65±2.74%;p=0.009)训练方案对 RE 产生了类似的改善,而在选定的研究中,等长训练(%变化=-2.20±4.37%;p=0.324)没有产生显著效果。多元线性荟萃回归分析表明,受试者和重量训练方案元素的上述特征可以解释所有 %变化之间的差异。该模型表明,RE 的%变化幅度与训练持续时间较长(β=-0.83±0.72,p=0.02)有关。
爆发力训练和大重量训练是在几周内提高 RE 的有效同时训练方法。然而,当希望尽可能地提高 RE 时,长期训练方案似乎是必要的。