Department of Sports, School of Physical Education, Physiotherapy and Occupational Therapy, Laboratory of Load Evaluation and Laboratory of nutrition and sport training, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil; and.
Department of Sports, School of Physical Education, Physiotherapy and Occupational Therapy, Laboratory of Load Evaluation, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
J Strength Cond Res. 2021 Nov 1;35(11):3028-3034. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000003270.
Drummond, MDM, Couto, BP, Oliveira, MP, and Szmuchrowski, LA. Effects of local vibration on dynamic strength training. J Strength Cond Res 35(11): 3028-3034, 2021-The study aim was to compare the chronic effects of maximal dynamic strength training with and without the addition of local vibration (LV) on maximal force generation and hypertrophy of the elbow flexor muscles in trained subjects. Twenty men were divided into 2 groups (conventional training [CT] group and vibration training [VT] group). The CT group performed conventional maximal dynamic strength training, and the VT group performed maximal dynamic strength training with mechanical vibrations (frequency of 26 Hz and amplitude of 6 mm). CT and VT groups performed 5 sets of 3-4 repetitions, with 2-minute rest intervals between sets. The subjects trained 3 times per week for 12 weeks. After the training period, the CT group presented a significant increase in the mean 1 repetition maximum (1RM) value in the elbow flexion exercise in the orthostatic position (EFO) (7.2 ± 1.5%) (p < 0.0001) and elbow flexion exercise using the Scott bench (EFSB) (6.3 ± 1.8%) (p < 0.0001). The VT group also showed significant increases in 1RM values in the EFO (6.87 ± 0.8%) (p < 0.0001) and EFSB (6.56 ± 1.4%) (p < 0.0001). The CT group presented a significant increase in the mean maximal voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) value after the training period (8.2 ± 2.3%) (p < 0.0001). The VT group also showed a significant increase in the mean MVIC value after training (9.1 ± 2.4%) (p < 0.0001). After the training period, both groups presented a significant increase in the mean value of elbow flexor thickness (CT = 5.6 ± 3.5%, VT = 5.1 ± 2.8%) (p = 0.001). The increases in 1RM, MVIC, and muscle thickness were statically similar between groups. Therefore, the addition of LV does not represent an additional stimulus for individuals trained in dynamic maximal strength training.
德拉蒙德、MDM、库托、BP、奥利维拉、MP 和斯姆丘罗夫斯基，LA。局部振动对动力强度训练的影响。J 力量与条件研究 35（11）：3028-3034，2021 年-本研究旨在比较最大动态强度训练的慢性效应，以及在训练有素的受试者中加入局部振动（LV）对肘部屈肌最大力产生和肥大的影响。20 名男性分为 2 组（常规训练[CT]组和振动训练[VT]组）。CT 组进行常规最大动态强度训练，VT 组进行机械振动（频率 26Hz，振幅 6mm）的最大动态强度训练。CT 和 VT 组进行 5 组 3-4 次重复，组间休息 2 分钟。受试者每周训练 3 次，持续 12 周。训练期结束后，CT 组在肘部伸展运动中的平均 1 次重复最大（1RM）值在直立位置（EFO）中显著增加（7.2±1.5%）（p<0.0001），在斯科特凳上的肘部伸展运动（EFSB）中也显著增加（6.3±1.8%）（p<0.0001）。VT 组在 EFO（6.87±0.8%）（p<0.0001）和 EFSB（6.56±1.4%）（p<0.0001）中的 1RM 值也显著增加。CT 组在训练后平均最大自主等长收缩（MVIC）值显著增加（8.2±2.3%）（p<0.0001）。VT 组在训练后平均 MVIC 值也显著增加（9.1±2.4%）（p<0.0001）。训练结束后，两组肘部屈肌厚度的平均数值均显著增加（CT=5.6±3.5%，VT=5.1±2.8%）（p=0.001）。1RM、MVIC 和肌肉厚度的增加在组间具有统计学意义上的相似性。因此，LV 的加入对于接受动态最大强度训练的个体来说并不是额外的刺激。
