Physiology of Work and Exercise Response (POWER) Laboratory, Institute of Exercise Physiology and Rehabilitation Science, University of Central Florida, Orlando, Florida; and.
Division of Kinesiology, School of Kinesiology and Physical Therapy, University of Central Florida, Orlando, Florida.
J Strength Cond Res. 2021 Mar 1;35(3):586-595. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000003893.
Boffey, D, Clark, NW, and Fukuda, DH. Efficacy of rest redistribution during squats: Considerations for strength and sex. J Strength Cond Res 35(3): 586-595, 2021-This study examined the kinematic, perceptual, and heart rate responses to rest redistribution (RR) and traditional sets (TS) during the barbell back squat for men and women possessing a wide range of strength levels. Forty-five resistance-trained subjects (30 men and 15 women) performed 40 repetitions of the barbell squat with 65% 1RM load with TS (4 × 10 repetitions, 3-minute rest) or RR (10 × 4 repetitions, 1-minute rest), in a randomized order on days separated by ≥72 hours. The significance was set at p ≤ 0.05 for all statistical analyses. The mean velocity (MV) maintenance was significantly higher for RR compared with TS (87.70 ± 4.50% vs. 84.07 ± 4.48%, respectively; p < 0.01, d = 0.35). Rating of perceived exertion (active muscles) was significantly lower for RR compared with TS (5.38 ± 1.42 vs. 6.08 ± 1.43, respectively; p = 0.02, d = -0.35). Rating of perceived exertion (overall) was also significantly lower for RR compared with TS (5.60 ± 1.40 vs. 6.48 ± 1.49, respectively; p = 0.02, d = -0.37). The relative strength ratio (relative strength ratio; squat 1RM: body mass) was significantly correlated with the difference in MV maintenance between RR and TS (r = -0.34, p = 0.02). No sex-based differences (p > 0.05) were found for any dependent variables. Rest redistribution produced significantly higher mean HR (143.25 ± 21.11 vs. 135.05 ± 20.74, p < 0.01) and minimum HR (102.77 ± 19.58 vs. 95.97 ± 22.17, p < 0.01). Subjects were better able to maintain velocity with RR compared with TS, while experiencing less perceived effort. Rest redistribution can be recommended for both men and women, but very strong individuals may not improve their velocity maintenance with RR to the same extent as less strong individuals.
博菲、克拉克、福原和。蹲坐时休息再分配的功效:考虑力量和性别。J 强实力研究 35(3):586-595,2021-本研究考察了在杠铃深蹲中,休息再分配(RR)和传统组(TS)的运动学、知觉和心率反应,参与者为具有广泛力量水平的男性和女性。45 名受过抗阻训练的受试者(30 名男性和 15 名女性)以 65% 1RM 负荷进行 40 次杠铃深蹲,采用 TS(4×10 次重复,3 分钟休息)或 RR(10×4 次重复,1 分钟休息),随机顺序进行,两次之间至少间隔 72 小时。所有统计分析的显著性水平均为 p≤0.05。RR 组的平均速度(MV)保持显著高于 TS 组(分别为 87.70±4.50%和 84.07±4.48%;p<0.01,d=0.35)。RR 组的运动知觉(活跃肌肉)明显低于 TS 组(分别为 5.38±1.42 和 6.08±1.43;p=0.02,d=-0.35)。RR 组的整体运动知觉(整体)也明显低于 TS 组(分别为 5.60±1.40 和 6.48±1.49;p=0.02,d=-0.37)。相对力量比(相对力量比;深蹲 1RM:体重)与 RR 和 TS 之间 MV 保持的差异呈显著正相关(r=-0.34,p=0.02)。任何依赖变量均未发现基于性别的差异(p>0.05)。RR 产生的平均 HR(143.25±21.11 与 135.05±20.74,p<0.01)和最小 HR(102.77±19.58 与 95.97±22.17,p<0.01)明显更高。与 TS 相比,RR 使受试者能够更好地保持速度,同时减少感知的努力。RR 可推荐用于男性和女性,但非常强壮的个体可能无法像不那么强壮的个体那样提高 RR 的速度保持能力。