Department of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Water Research Group, North West University, Potchefstroom, South Africa.
Sports Med. 2018 Jan;48(1):177-188. doi: 10.1007/s40279-017-0784-1.
There is a necessity for numerous sports to develop strength and aerobic capacity simultaneously, placing a significant demand upon the practice of effective concurrent training methods. Concurrent training requires the athlete to perform both resistance and endurance exercise within a training plan. This training paradigm has been associated with an 'interference effect', with attenuated strength adaptation in comparison to that following isolated resistance training. The effectiveness of the training programme rests on the intricacies of manipulating acute training variables, such as exercise sequence. The research, in the most part, does not provide a clarity of message as to whether intra-session exercise sequence has the potential to exacerbate or mitigate the interference effect associated with concurrent training methods.
The aim of the systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess whether intra-session concurrent exercise sequence modifies strength-based outcomes associated with the interference effect.
Ten studies were identified from a systematic review of the literature for the outcomes of lower-body dynamic and static strength, lower-body hypertrophy, maximal aerobic capacity and body fat percentage. Each study examined the effect of intra-session exercise sequence on the specified outcomes, across a prolonged (≥5 weeks) concurrent training programme in healthy adults.
Analysis of pooled data indicated that resistance-endurance exercise sequence had a positive effect for lower-body dynamic strength, in comparison to the alternate sequence (weighted mean difference, 6.91% change; 95% confidence interval 1.96, 11.87 change; p = 0.006), with no effect of exercise sequence for lower-body muscle hypertrophy (weighted mean difference, 1.15% change; 95% confidence interval -1.56, 3.87 change; p = 0.40), lower-body static strength (weighted mean difference, -0.04% change; 95% confidence interval -3.19, 3.11 change; p = 0.98), or the remaining outcomes of maximal aerobic capacity and body fat percentage (p > 0.05).
These results indicate that the practice of concurrent training with a resistance followed by an endurance exercise order is beneficial for the outcome of lower-body dynamic strength, while alternating the order of stimuli offers no benefit for training outcomes associated with the interference effect.
许多运动项目都需要同时发展力量和有氧能力，这对有效并进行行之有效的同时训练方法提出了很高的要求。同时训练要求运动员在训练计划中同时进行抗阻训练和耐力训练。这种训练模式与“干扰效应”有关，与单独进行抗阻训练相比，力量适应性会减弱。训练计划的有效性取决于对急性训练变量的细微操作，例如运动顺序。研究在很大程度上并没有清楚地表明，在单次训练中，运动顺序是否有可能加剧或减轻与同时训练方法相关的干扰效应。
本系统评价和荟萃分析的目的是评估单次训练中同时进行的运动顺序是否会改变与干扰效应相关的基于力量的结果。
从文献综述中确定了 10 项研究，这些研究评估了下肢动态和静态力量、下肢肥大、最大有氧能力和体脂百分比等结果。每项研究都在健康成年人进行了延长（≥5 周）同时训练计划中，检查了单次训练中运动顺序对特定结果的影响。
汇总数据分析表明，与交替顺序相比，抗阻-耐力运动顺序对下肢动态力量有积极影响（加权均数差值，6.91%的变化；95%置信区间 1.96，11.87 的变化；p=0.006），而运动顺序对下肢肌肉肥大（加权均数差值，1.15%的变化；95%置信区间 -1.56，3.87 的变化；p=0.40）、下肢静态力量（加权均数差值，-0.04%的变化；95%置信区间 -3.19，3.11 的变化；p=0.98）或最大有氧能力和体脂百分比的剩余结果没有影响（p>0.05）。
这些结果表明，在同时训练中进行抗阻训练后进行耐力训练的顺序有利于下肢动态力量的结果，而交替刺激顺序对与干扰效应相关的训练结果没有好处。
