Astorino Todd A, Pierce Shealin, Piva Madisen B, Metcalfe Richard S, Vollaard Niels B J
Department of Kinesiology, CSU-San Marcos, San Marcos, CA, USA.
Applied Sports, Technology, Exercise and Medicine (A-STEM) Research Center, Swansea University, Swansea, UK.
Sports Med Health Sci. 2024 Feb 6;6(4):385-393. doi: 10.1016/j.smhs.2024.01.007. eCollection 2024 Dec.
Increases in power output and maximal oxygen consumption ( max) occur in response to sprint interval exercise (SIE), but common use of "all-out" intensities presents a barrier for many adults. Furthermore, lower-body SIE is not feasible for all adults. We compared physiological and perceptual responses to supramaximal, but "non-all-out" SIE between leg and arm cycling exercise. Twenty-four active adults (mean ± age: [25 ± 7] y; cycling max: [39 ± 7] mL·kg·min) performed incremental exercise using leg (LCE) and arm cycle ergometry (ACE) to determine max and maximal work capacity (Wmax). Subsequently, they performed four 20 s bouts of SIE at 130% Wmax on the LCE or ACE at cadence = 120-130 rev/min, with 2 min recovery between intervals. Gas exchange data, heart rate (HR), blood lactate concentration (BLa), rating of perceived exertion (RPE), and affective valence were acquired. Data showed significantly lower ( < 0.001) absolute mean ([1.24 ± 0.31] L·min vs. [1.59 ± 0.34] L·min; = 1.08) and peak ([1.79 ± 0.48] L·min vs. [2.10 ± 0.44] L·min; = 0.70) with ACE versus LCE. However, ACE elicited significantly higher ( < 0.001) relative mean ([62% ± 9%] max vs. [57% ± 7%] max, = 0.63) and peak ([88% ± 10%] max vs. [75% ± 10%] max, = 1.33). Post-exercise BLa was significantly higher ([7.0 ± 1.7] mM vs. [5.7 ± 1.5] mM, = 0.024, = 0.83) for LCE versus ACE. There was no significant effect of modality on RPE or affective valence ( > 0.42), and lowest affective valence recorded (2.0 ± 1.8) was considered "good to fairly good". Data show that non "all-out" ACE elicits lower absolute but higher relative HR and compared to LCE. Less aversive perceptual responses could make this non-all-out modality feasible for inactive adults.
短跑间歇运动(SIE)可使功率输出和最大摄氧量( max)增加,但许多成年人难以采用常见的“全力”强度进行锻炼。此外,并非所有成年人都适合进行下肢SIE。我们比较了腿部和手臂骑行运动中,超最大但“非全力”SIE的生理和感知反应。24名活跃成年人(平均年龄:[25±7]岁;骑行 max:[39±7] mL·kg·min)使用腿部运动(LCE)和手臂功率计(ACE)进行递增运动,以确定 max和最大工作能力(Wmax)。随后,他们在LCE或ACE上以每分钟120 - 130转的节奏,以130%Wmax进行四组20秒的SIE,组间休息2分钟。采集气体交换数据、心率(HR)、血乳酸浓度(BLa)、主观用力程度分级(RPE)和情感效价。数据显示,与LCE相比,ACE的绝对平均([1.24±0.31] L·min对[1.59±0.34] L·min; = 1.08)和峰值 ([1.79±0.48] L·min对[2.10±0.44] L·min; = 0.70)显著更低( < 0.001)。然而,ACE引起的相对平均([62%±9%] max对[57%±7%] max, = 0.63)和峰值 ([88%±10%] max对[75%±10%] max, = 1.33)显著更高( < 0.001)。运动后,LCE的BLa显著高于ACE([7.0±1.7] mM对[5.7±1.5] mM, = 0.024, = 0.83)。运动方式对RPE或情感效价没有显著影响( > 0.42),记录到的最低情感效价(2.0±1.8)被认为“良好到较好”。数据表明,与LCE相比,非“全力”ACE引起的绝对HR和 更低,但相对更高。较低的厌恶感知反应可能使这种非全力运动方式对不活跃的成年人可行。