检测因运动训练及随后的停训导致的心肺适能变化的评估方法。
Estimation methods to detect changes in cardiorespiratory fitness due to exercise training and subsequent detraining.
作者信息
Matsuo Tomoaki, So Rina, Murai Fumiko
机构信息
Ergonomics Research Group, National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, Japan, Kawasaki, Japan.
Research Center for Overwork-Related Disorders, National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, Japan, Kawasaki, Japan.
出版信息
Eur J Appl Physiol. 2023 Apr;123(4):877-889. doi: 10.1007/s00421-022-05113-z. Epub 2022 Dec 23.
PURPOSE
To determine whether estimated maximal oxygen consumption ([Formula: see text]) can detect cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) changes by behavioral modifications. This study compared changes in measured [Formula: see text]O (m[Formula: see text]O) through exercise intervention with e[Formula: see text]O using a multiple regression model (MRM) and linear extrapolation method (LEM).
METHODS
A cross-sectional analysis involving 173 adults was conducted to establish an MRM by including age, sex, body mass index, questionnaire score, heart rate (HR) from step test, and m[Formula: see text]O. Subsequently, 15 men participated in an intervention experiment comprising an 8-week, high-intensity interval training, followed by 8-week detraining, and completed anthropometric measurements, questionnaires, step tests, and m[Formula: see text]O tests. m[Formula: see text]O changes throughout the intervention were compared to e[Formula: see text]O changes calculated using the MRM and LEM. The LEM used the HR during the step test with constant values (predetermined [Formula: see text]O), such as the Chester step test.
RESULTS
Inclusion of the step test HR in a questionnaire-based MRM improved the estimation power, although the MRM underestimated higher m[Formula: see text]O values. In the intervention, m[Formula: see text]O increased by 20.0 ± 14.1% (P < 0.01) and subsequently decreased by 9.5 ± 6.6% (P < 0.01) after exercise training and detraining, respectively. Significant method × time interactions were observed between m[Formula: see text]O and e[Formula: see text]O in the MRM but not in the LEM, i.e., an apparent systematic error (underestimation of high values) of the MRM was absent in the LEM, although the correlation between m[Formula: see text]O and e[Formula: see text]O using the LEM was moderate.
CONCLUSION
e[Formula: see text]O, particularly using the MRM with HR as an explanatory factor, is not an appropriate method for detecting CRF changes along with behavioral modifications.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION
Registered number, UMIN000041031; Registered date, 2020/07/08; URL, https://center6.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr_e/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000046855.
目的
确定估计的最大摄氧量（[公式：见正文]）是否能够通过行为改变来检测心肺适能（CRF）的变化。本研究使用多元回归模型（MRM）和线性外推法（LEM），比较了通过运动干预测得的[公式：见正文]O（m[公式：见正文]O）与估计的[公式：见正文]O（e[公式：见正文]O）的变化。
方法
进行了一项涉及173名成年人的横断面分析，通过纳入年龄、性别、体重指数、问卷得分、台阶试验心率（HR）和m[公式：见正文]O来建立MRM。随后，15名男性参与了一项干预实验，该实验包括为期8周的高强度间歇训练，随后是8周的停训期，并完成了人体测量、问卷调查、台阶试验和m[公式：见正文]O测试。将整个干预过程中m[公式：见正文]O的变化与使用MRM和LEM计算出的e[公式：见正文]O的变化进行比较。LEM使用台阶试验期间的HR以及恒定值（预先确定的[公式：见正文]O），如切斯特台阶试验。
结果
在基于问卷的MRM中纳入台阶试验HR可提高估计能力，尽管MRM低估了较高水平的m[公式：见正文]O值。在干预过程中，运动训练后m[公式：见正文]O增加了20.0±14.1%（P<0.01），随后停训后下降了9.5±6.6%（P<0.01）。在MRM中观察到m[公式：见正文]O与e[公式：见正文]O之间存在显著的方法×时间交互作用，但在LEM中未观察到，即LEM中不存在MRM明显的系统误差（高估高值），尽管使用LEM时m[公式：见正文]O与e[公式：见正文]O之间的相关性为中等。
结论
e[公式：见正文]O，特别是将HR作为解释因素的MRM，不是检测随行为改变的CRF变化的合适方法。
临床试验注册
注册号，UMIN000041031；注册日期，2020/07/08；网址，https://center6.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr_e/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000046855。
Zotero 插件