Iglesias-Soler Eliseo, Fernández-Del-Olmo Miguel, Mayo Xián, Fariñas Juan, Río-Rodríguez Dan, Carballeira Eduardo, Carnero Elvis A, Standley Robert A, Giráldez-García Manuel A, Dopico-Calvo Xurxo, Tuimil Jose Luis
1 University of A Coruna.
2 Translational Research Institute for Metabolism and Diabetes, Florida Hospital.
J Appl Biomech. 2017 Apr;33(2):144-152. doi: 10.1123/jab.2016-0181. Epub 2016 Dec 5.
The main aim of this study was to analyze the effect of resistance training programs differing in set configuration on mechanical force-velocity profiles. Thirteen participants performed 10 unilateral knee extension training sessions over 5 weeks. Each limb was randomized to one of the following set configurations: traditional (4 sets of 8 repetitions at maximum intended velocity, 10RM load, 3-min pause between sets) or interrepetition rest (32 maximum intended velocity repetitions, 10RM load, 17.4 s of rest between each repetition). Velocity of each repetition was recorded throughout the program. Before and after training, individual linear force velocities were calculated, and the following parameters were obtained: force and velocity axis intercept, slope, and estimated maximum power. Mean velocity was higher throughout the program for interrepetition rest configuration (0.54 ± 0.01 vs. 0.48 ± 0.01 m∙s for interrepetition rest, and traditional configuration respectively; main effect of set configuration: P < .001). There was a significant increase in force and velocity intercepts, but a steeper negative slope after both training protocols (main effect of time: P < .001 for every variable). Differences in resistance training velocity did not affect the adaptations. Our results suggest that, in a short-term program, maximum intended rather than actual velocity is a key factor to modulate strength adaptations.
本研究的主要目的是分析不同组间配置的抗阻训练计划对机械力-速度曲线的影响。13名参与者在5周内进行了10次单侧膝关节伸展训练。每侧肢体被随机分配到以下组间配置之一：传统组（以最大预期速度进行4组，每组8次重复，10RM负荷，组间休息3分钟）或重复间休息组（32次最大预期速度重复，10RM负荷，每次重复间休息17.4秒）。在整个训练过程中记录每次重复的速度。在训练前后，计算个体线性力速度，并获得以下参数：力和速度轴截距、斜率以及估计的最大功率。重复间休息组在整个训练过程中的平均速度更高（重复间休息组为0.54±0.01米/秒，传统组为0.48±0.01米/秒；组间配置的主要效应：P<.001）。两种训练方案后，力和速度截距均显著增加，但斜率更陡（时间的主要效应：每个变量P<.001）。抗阻训练速度的差异并未影响适应性变化。我们的结果表明，在短期训练计划中，最大预期速度而非实际速度是调节力量适应性的关键因素。
