Ben Othman Aymen, Hadjizadeh Anvar Saman, Aragão-Santos José Carlos, Chaouachi Anis, Behm David G
Tunisian Research Laboratory "Sport Performance Optimisation", National Center of Medicine and Science in Sports, Tunis,Tunisia.
School of Human Kinetics and Recreation, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, NF,Canada.
Pediatr Exerc Sci. 2024 Sep 12:1-9. doi: 10.1123/pes.2024-0027.
An extensive number of publications have examined cross-education effects with adults, primarily investigating contralateral homologous (same) muscles. There are far fewer investigations on cross-education effects on contralateral heterologous (different) muscles and age (youth vs adult) and no studies investigating sex differences. Hence, the objective was to compare cross-education in female and male youth and young adults to contralateral homologous (chest press [CP], elbow flexors and extensors, handgrip isometric strength, and shot put) and heterologous (leg press, knee extension isometric strength, and countermovement jump) muscles. Twenty-eight female adults, 28 female youth, 28 male adults, and 28 male youth (total: 112) were examined before and after an 8-week (3 sessions/wk) unilateral, dominant arm, CP training program. Unilateral testing assessed dominant and nondominant leg press and CP 1-repetition maximum, knee extensors, elbow extensors, elbow flexors, and handgrip maximum voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) strength, as well as shot put distance and countermovement jump height. Unilateral CP training induced training specific (CP 1-repetition maximum) and nonspecific (elbow extensors, elbow flexors, handgrip MVIC force, and shot put distance) improvements (P < .04, η2: .45-.85) but no significant lower body improvements. There was evidence for testing limb specificity as the dominant arm provided significantly (P < .021, η2: .17-.75) greater training gains than the nondominant arm. Youth's training adaptations exceeded with unilateral CP 1-repetition maximum, elbow extensors MVIC force, and shot put distance (P < .049, η2: .14-.49). No sex main effect differences were apparent. In conclusion, cross-education was training specific (greatest gains with upper body and dominant limbs) with greater benefits for youth and generally no sex differences with the exception of elbow extensors MVIC.
大量出版物研究了成年人的交叉训练效应,主要调查对侧同源(相同)肌肉。关于对侧异源(不同)肌肉以及年龄(青年与成年人)的交叉训练效应的研究要少得多,且尚无研究调查性别差异。因此,本研究的目的是比较青年和年轻成年人中男性与女性在对侧同源(卧推[CP]、肘屈肌和伸肌、握力等长力量以及铅球)和异源(腿举、膝关节伸展等长力量以及纵跳)肌肉上的交叉训练情况。对28名成年女性、28名青年女性、28名成年男性和28名青年男性(共112人)在进行为期8周(每周3次训练)的单侧优势臂CP训练计划前后进行了测试。单侧测试评估优势腿和非优势腿的腿举以及CP的1次重复最大值、膝关节伸肌、肘关节伸肌、肘关节屈肌和握力的最大自主等长收缩(MVIC)力量,以及铅球投掷距离和纵跳高度。单侧CP训练引起了训练特异性(CP的1次重复最大值)和非特异性(肘关节伸肌、肘关节屈肌、握力MVIC力量和铅球投掷距离)的改善(P <.04,η2:.45 -.85),但对下肢没有显著改善。有证据表明测试肢体具有特异性,因为优势臂的训练收益显著高于非优势臂(P <.021,η2:.17 -.75)。青年在单侧CP的1次重复最大值、肘关节伸肌MVIC力量和铅球投掷距离方面的训练适应性更强(P <.049,η2:.14 -.49)。未发现明显的性别主效应差异。总之,交叉训练具有训练特异性(上身和优势肢体的收益最大),对青年更有益,除肘关节伸肌MVIC外,一般没有性别差异。