Suppr超能文献

两种大重量设定训练方案对业余男性抗阻训练效果的影响。

Impact of Two High-Volume Set Configuration Workouts on Resistance Training Outcomes in Recreationally Trained Men.

机构信息

Department of Exercise and Sport Science, LUNEX International University of Health, Exercise and Sports, Differdingen, Luxemburg.

Department of Life and Sport Science, University of Greenwich, Medway, Kent, United Kingdom ; and.

出版信息

J Strength Cond Res. 2021 Feb 1;35(Suppl 1):S136-S143. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000003163.

Abstract

Karsten, DB, Fu, Y, Larumbe-Zabala, DE, Seijo, DM, and Naclerio, DF. Impact of two high-volume set configuration workouts on resistance training outcomes in recreationally trained men. J Strength Cond Res 35(2S): S136-S143, 2021-This study compared the effects of 2 weekly equalized by volume, loading zone and frequency resistance training designs using repetition to failure (RTF) or not to failure (NTF), on body composition, strength, and mechanical power. Based on individual baseline maximal strength, 18 recreationally resistance-trained men were pair-matched and consequently randomly assigned to an RTF (n = 9) or an NTF (n = 9) protocol. Subjects trained for 6 weeks using 2 different routines performed once per week (2 workouts per week). The RTF protocol comprised 4 sets of 10 repetitions per exercise with 2-minute rest and the NTF involved 8 sets of 5 repetitions per exercise with 1-minute rest. Subjects were tested pre- and post-intervention for maximal strength, upper- and lower-body power, fat-free mass, limb circumferences, and muscle thickness. Compared to baseline, both groups improved (p < 0.01) the maximal loads lifted in the bench press (RTF +9.44 ± 3.00 kg; NTF +7.22 ± 4.41 kg) and the squat (RTF +9.44 ± 4.64 kg; NTF +11.1 ± 10.33 kg) exercises, but only the NTF group increased (p < 0.05) upper-body power (+15.73 ± 12.59 W). Conversely, only the RTF group showed significant (p < 0.05) increase of the elbow flexors (+3.44 ± 5.11 mm) and vastus medialis (+3.28 ± 2.32 mm) thickness, whereas both groups enhanced anterior deltoid thickness (RTF +1.84 ± 1.68 mm, p < 0.05; NTF +2.76 ± 2.63 mm, p < 0.01). Although both training strategies improved strength, the RTF group elicited superior hypertrophic outcomes, whereas the NTF protocol resulted in more favorable improvements for upper-body power.

摘要

卡尔斯滕、DB、傅、Y、拉鲁姆贝-扎巴拉、DE、塞霍、DM 和纳克里奥、DF。两种高容量设定锻炼对有经验的男性抗阻训练结果的影响。J 力量与调理研究 35(增刊 2):S136-S143,2021 年-本研究比较了两种每周相等的基于重复次数到失败(RTF)或非失败(NTF)的训练设计,对身体成分、力量和机械功率的影响。基于个体的基础最大力量,18 名有经验的抗阻训练男性进行了配对,并随机分配到 RTF(n = 9)或 NTF(n = 9)方案。受试者每周进行 2 次训练(每周 2 次训练),共进行 6 周。RTF 方案包括每组 10 次重复的 4 组,每组休息 2 分钟,而 NTF 涉及每组 5 次重复的 8 组,每组休息 1 分钟。受试者在干预前后进行最大力量、上下肢力量、无脂肪质量、肢体围度和肌肉厚度测试。与基线相比,两组均提高了卧推(RTF 增加 9.44 ± 3.00 千克;NTF 增加 7.22 ± 4.41 千克)和深蹲(RTF 增加 9.44 ± 4.64 千克;NTF 增加 11.1 ± 10.33 千克)的最大负荷,但只有 NTF 组提高了上肢力量(+15.73 ± 12.59 W)。相反,只有 RTF 组显示出肘屈肌(+3.44 ± 5.11 毫米)和股内侧肌(+3.28 ± 2.32 毫米)厚度的显著增加(p < 0.05),而两组均增强了三角肌前束厚度(RTF +1.84 ± 1.68 毫米,p < 0.05;NTF +2.76 ± 2.63 毫米,p < 0.01)。尽管两种训练策略都提高了力量,但 RTF 组引起了更好的肥大效果,而 NTF 方案对上肢力量的改善更为有利。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验