Londeree B R
Department of Health and Exercise Sciences, University of Missouri, Columbia 65203, USA.
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1997 Jun;29(6):837-43. doi: 10.1097/00005768-199706000-00016.
The purpose of the investigation was to determine the effect of exercise training intensity on the lactate and ventilatory thresholds in sedentary and in active subjects using meta-analysis procedures. The original analyses included 85 study groups from 34 studies. The dependent variable was oxygen consumption at the specified threshold, and the independent variables were training intensity (control and four intensities ranging from below threshold to near maximum) and fitness level (sedentary and conditioned). Data were analyzed statistically using methods described by Hedges and Olkin (13). The results showed that sedentary subjects (effect size (ES) = 2.32) improved significantly over controls (ES = 0.15), while conditioned subjects (ES = 0.63) showed nonsignificant gains. There were no significant differences among training intensities within the fitness categories (Sed ES = 1.6 - 3.1; Cond ES = 0.3 - 1.1) although the conditioned subjects tended to respond better to high intensity training (ES of 1.1 vs 0.4). It was concluded that training at an intensity near the lactate or ventilatory threshold is an adequate training stimulus for improving the thresholds for sedentary subjects, but a higher intensity may be necessary for conditioned subjects. Detraining will reduce lactate and ventilatory thresholds.
本研究的目的是采用荟萃分析程序,确定运动训练强度对久坐不动者和活跃受试者乳酸阈值和通气阈值的影响。原始分析纳入了来自34项研究的85个研究组。因变量是特定阈值下的耗氧量,自变量是训练强度(对照组以及从阈值以下到接近最大值的四种强度)和健康水平(久坐不动者和有运动习惯者)。使用Hedges和Olkin(13)描述的方法对数据进行统计学分析。结果显示,久坐不动的受试者(效应量(ES)=2.32)相比对照组(ES = 0.15)有显著改善,而有运动习惯的受试者(ES = 0.63)改善不显著。在不同健康水平类别中,训练强度之间没有显著差异(久坐不动者ES = 1.6 - 3.1;有运动习惯者ES = 0.3 - 1.1),尽管有运动习惯的受试者对高强度训练的反应往往更好(ES为1.1对0.4)。研究得出结论,在接近乳酸阈值或通气阈值的强度下进行训练,对于提高久坐不动者的阈值是一种适当的训练刺激,但对于有运动习惯的受试者可能需要更高的强度。停止训练会降低乳酸阈值和通气阈值。