Aquatic Sports Research Group, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul,Porto Alegre 90040-060, Brazil.
Faculty of Sport, CIFI2D and Porto Biomechanics Laboratory (LABIOMEP-UP), University of Porto, 4099-002 Porto, Portugal.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Nov 26;16(23):4715. doi: 10.3390/ijerph16234715.
: to compare different methods to assess the arm stroke efficiency (? ), whenswimming front crawl using the arms only on the Measurement of Active Drag System (MADSystem) and in a free-swimming condition, and to identify biophysical adaptations to swimming onthe MAD System and the main biophysical predictors of maximal swimming speed in the 200 mfront crawl using the arms only (?). : fourteen swimmers performed twice a 5 × 200 mincremental trial swimming the front crawl stroke using the arms only, once swimming freely, andonce swimming on the MAD System. The total metabolic power was assessed in both conditions.The biomechanical parameters were obtained from video analysis and force data recorded on theMAD System. The ? was calculated using: (i) direct measures of mechanical and metabolic power(power-based method); (ii) forward speed/hand speed ratio (speed-based method), and (iii) thesimplified paddle-wheel model. : both methods to assess ? on the MAD System differed (p< 0.001) from the expected values for this condition (? = 1), with the speed-based method providingthe closest values (?0.96). In the free-swimming condition, the power-based (?0.75), speedbased(?0.62), and paddle-wheel (?0.39) efficiencies were significantly different (p < 0.001).Although all methods provided values within the limits of agreement, the speed-based methodprovided the closest values to the "actual efficiency". The main biophysical predictors of ?were included in two models: biomechanical (R = 0.98) and physiological (R = 0.98). :our results suggest that the speed-based method provides the closest values to the "actual ?" andconfirm that swimming performance depends on the balance of biomechanical and bioenergeticparameters.
：比较仅使用手臂进行自由泳时在主动阻力系统（MAD 系统）和自由泳条件下评估手臂划水效率（？）的不同方法，并确定在 MAD 系统上游泳的生物物理适应性以及仅使用手臂进行 200 米自由泳的最大游泳速度的主要生物物理预测因子（？）。：14 名游泳运动员两次进行 5×200 米递增试验，仅使用手臂进行自由泳和 MAD 系统游泳。在两种情况下均评估总代谢功率。通过视频分析和 MAD 系统上记录的力数据获得生物力学参数。通过以下三种方法计算？：（i）机械和代谢功率的直接测量（基于功率的方法）；（ii）前进速度/手速比（基于速度的方法），和（iii）简化的桨轮模型。：在 MAD 系统上评估？的两种方法均与该条件下的预期值（？=1）不同（p<0.001），基于速度的方法提供了最接近的值（？0.96）。在自由泳条件下，基于功率的方法（？0.75）、基于速度的方法（？0.62）和桨轮模型（？0.39）效率有显著差异（p<0.001）。尽管所有方法都提供了在一致性限内的值，但基于速度的方法提供了最接近“实际效率”的值。？的主要生物物理预测因子包含在两个模型中：生物力学（R=0.98）和生理学（R=0.98）。：我们的结果表明，基于速度的方法提供了最接近“实际？”的值，并证实游泳表现取决于生物力学和生物能量参数的平衡。
Zotero 插件
