Suppr超能文献

上身运动模式之间峰值摄氧量的比较:一项系统文献综述与荟萃分析

Comparison of Peak Oxygen Uptake Between Upper-Body Exercise Modes: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis.

作者信息

Baumgart Julia Kathrin, Brurok Berit, Sandbakk Øyvind

机构信息

Department of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Centre for Elite Sports Research, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.

Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, St. Olav's University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway.

出版信息

Front Physiol. 2020 May 19;11:412. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2020.00412. eCollection 2020.

Abstract

To compare peak oxygen uptake (VO) between the asynchronous arm crank ergometry (ACE), and synchronous wheelchair ergometry (WERG), wheelchair treadmill (WTR), and upper-body poling (UBP) mode. PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, and SPORTDiscus™ were systematically searched, and identified studies screened based on title, abstract, and thereafter full-text. Studies comparing VO between ≥2 of the modes were included. A meta-analysis was performed by pooling the differences in VO between upper-body exercise modes. The quality of the included studies was assessed and the level of evidence (LoE) established for each mode comparison. Meta-regression analyses investigated the effect of total body mass and participant-related characteristics (% of able-bodied participants, % of participants with tetraplegia and % of participants who are wheelchair athletes) on differences in VO between modes. Of the 19 studies included in this review, 14 studies investigated the difference in absolute and body-mass normalized VO between ACE and WERG, and 5 studies examined the differences between ACE and WTR. No significant difference in absolute or body-mass normalized VO was found between ACE and WERG (overall effect ±95% CI: 0.01 ± 0.06 L·min and 0.06 ± 1.2 ml·kg·min, both > 0.75; LoE: strong). No significant difference in absolute or body-mass normalized VO was found between ACE and WTR (overall effect ±95% CI: -0.10 ± 0.18 L·min and -1.8 ± 2.5 ml·kg·min, both > 0.14; LoE: moderate). Absolute and/or body-mass normalized VO did not differ between WERG and WTR in one study with 13 participants (LoE: limited) and between ACE and UBP in one study with 18 participants (LoE: moderate). In the meta-regression analyses, there was no significant effect of the investigated factors on differences in VO. The differences between the asynchronous ACE and synchronous WERG propulsion, including possible differences in trunk involvement, do not seem to influence VO. Therefore, ACE and WERG can be used interchangeably to test VO. Possible differences in VO in all other mode comparisons remain unclear due to the wide CIs and limited to moderate LoE.

摘要

比较异步手臂曲柄测力计(ACE)、同步轮椅测力计(WERG)、轮椅跑步机(WTR)和上身撑杆(UBP)模式之间的峰值摄氧量(VO)。系统检索了PubMed、Scopus、CINAHL和SPORTDiscus™,并根据标题、摘要及全文对检索到的研究进行筛选。纳入比较≥2种模式之间VO的研究。通过汇总上身运动模式之间VO的差异进行荟萃分析。评估纳入研究的质量,并为每种模式比较确定证据水平(LoE)。荟萃回归分析研究了总体质量和参与者相关特征(健全参与者的百分比、四肢瘫痪参与者的百分比以及轮椅运动员参与者的百分比)对模式之间VO差异的影响。在本综述纳入的19项研究中,14项研究调查了ACE和WERG之间绝对和体重标准化VO的差异,5项研究检查了ACE和WTR之间的差异。ACE和WERG之间在绝对或体重标准化VO方面未发现显著差异(总体效应±95%CI:0.01±0.06L·min和0.06±1.2ml·kg·min,均>0.75;LoE:强)。ACE和WTR之间在绝对或体重标准化VO方面未发现显著差异(总体效应±95%CI:-0.10±0.18L·min和-1.8±2.5ml·kg·min,均>0.14;LoE:中等)。在一项有13名参与者的研究中,WERG和WTR之间的绝对和/或体重标准化VO没有差异(LoE:有限),在一项有18名参与者的研究中,ACE和UBP之间的绝对和/或体重标准化VO没有差异(LoE:中等)。在荟萃回归分析中,研究因素对VO差异没有显著影响。异步ACE和同步WERG推进之间的差异,包括躯干参与可能存在的差异,似乎不会影响VO。因此,ACE和WERG可互换使用以测试VO。由于置信区间较宽且LoE有限至中等,所有其他模式比较中VO的可能差异仍不清楚。

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