Department of Kinesiology, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, Mississippi.
Department of Health, Physical Education, and Recreation, University of North Alabama, Florence, Alabama.
J Strength Cond Res. 2018 May;32(5):1455-1461. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001993.
Waldman, HS, Heatherly, AJ, Waddell, AF, Krings, BM, and O'Neal, EK. Five-kilometer time trial reliability of a nonmotorized treadmill and comparison of physiological and perceptual responses vs. a motorized treadmill. J Strength Cond Res 32(5): 1455-1461, 2018-This study examined the reliability of running performance across 3 nonmotorized treadmill (NMT) 5-km time trials (TTs) and physiological, gait, and perceptual differences at a 5-km pace for both NMT and motorized treadmills (MTs). Ten male runners experienced in road racing who had never run on an NMT completed 3 TT to establish personal best 5-km pace. In a later session, participants ran at this pace for 5 minutes on the NMT while metabolic, gait, and perceptual measures were recorded and then ran at outdoor 5-km personal best pace on an MT at 1% grade (counter-balanced crossover design). Intraclass correlation (ICC = 0.95) between the TT1 and TT2 was strong but improved between TT2 and TT3 (ICC = 0.99) with considerable reduction in variability. Nonmotorized treadmill resulted in a 24% slower pace (10.6 ± 1.5 vs. 13.9 ± 2.6 km·h; p < 0.001), shorter stride length (1.02 ± 0.10 vs. 1.27 ± 0.18 m; p < 0.001), and decreased cadence (175 ± 12 vs. 181 ± 13 steps per·minute; p = 0.01). However, V[Combining Dot Above]O2, respiratory exchange ratio (RER), lactate concentration, and heart rate did not differ between modalities (NMT = 3.4 ± 0.4 L·min, 0.96 ± 0.04, 6.9 ± 3.7 mmol, 172 ± 10 b·min; MT = 3.4 ± 0.5 L·min, 0.96 ± 0.04, 5.7 ± 3.4 mmol, 170 ± 10 b·min). rate of perceived exertion (RPE) for legs, breathing, and overall did not differ between treadmill types. A familiarization session should be included for TT using NMT. Other than gait and pace characteristics similar responses were elicited by both treadmills when running at 5-km pace. However, with these considerations, NMT TT of 4-km might be more appropriate in matching MT 5-km TT duration without altering physiological responses significantly.
瓦尔德曼、希瑟利、惠特尔利、克林斯、奥纳尔。非电动跑步机 5 公里计时赛的可靠性以及与电动跑步机相比的生理和感知反应的比较。《力量与体能研究杂志》32(5):1455-1461,2018 年-本研究考察了在 3 次非电动跑步机(NMT)5 公里计时赛(TT)中跑步表现的可靠性,以及 NMT 和电动跑步机(MT)5 公里速度时的生理、步态和感知差异。10 名有公路赛车经验的男性跑步者从未在 NMT 上跑步,他们完成了 3 次 TT 以建立个人最佳 5 公里速度。在稍后的会议中,参与者在 NMT 上以这个速度跑 5 分钟,同时记录代谢、步态和感知测量值,然后在 1%坡度的户外以个人最佳 5 公里速度在 MT 上跑(平衡交叉设计)。TT1 和 TT2 之间的组内相关系数(ICC=0.95)较强,但 TT2 和 TT3 之间有所提高(ICC=0.99),变异性明显降低。NMT 的速度慢了 24%(10.6±1.5 与 13.9±2.6 公里/小时;p<0.001),步长缩短(1.02±0.10 与 1.27±0.18 米;p<0.001),步频降低(175±12 与 181±13 步/分钟;p=0.01)。然而,两种模式下的 V[Combining Dot Above]O2、呼吸交换比(RER)、乳酸浓度和心率没有差异(NMT=3.4±0.4L/min、0.96±0.04、6.9±3.7mmol、172±10b/min;MT=3.4±0.5L/min、0.96±0.04、5.7±3.4mmol、170±10b/min)。腿部、呼吸和整体的感觉用力(RPE)在两种跑步机之间没有差异。使用 NMT 进行 TT 时应包括一个适应期。在以 5 公里速度跑步时,除了步态和速度特征外,两种跑步机都产生了相似的反应。然而,考虑到这些因素,在不显著改变生理反应的情况下,4 公里的 NMT TT 可能更适合匹配 MT 5 公里 TT 的持续时间。