Influence of different soccer-specific maximal actions on physiological, perceptual and accelerometer measurement loads.

IF 1.3 Q3 SPORT SCIENCES Open Access Journal of Sports Medicine Pub Date : 2018-06-13 eCollection Date: 2018-01-01 DOI:10.2147/OAJSM.S167347
Terje Dalen, Ørjan Øverås, Roland van den Tillaar, Boye Welde, Erna Dianne von Heimburg
{"title":"Influence of different soccer-specific maximal actions on physiological, perceptual and accelerometer measurement loads.","authors":"Terje Dalen,&nbsp;Ørjan Øverås,&nbsp;Roland van den Tillaar,&nbsp;Boye Welde,&nbsp;Erna Dianne von Heimburg","doi":"10.2147/OAJSM.S167347","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aim of this study was to compare the effect of different soccer-specific maximal actions (Continuous run, Sprint, Sprint with change of direction [Sprint COD], Jump and Shot) upon physiological (oxygen uptake and heart rate) and perceptual (rating of perceived exertion [RPE]) responses and accelerometer load.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Ten moderately to well-trained male soccer players volunteered to serve as subjects in this study. A repeated within-subject design was used in which each subject was tested on five occasions on different days, one test each day, during a period of 2 weeks. Each of the five tests had a distance of 900 m and lasted 5 minutes, thus the mean speed for all five tests was 3 m/s. During the test, oxygen uptake, heart rate and accelerometer load were measured. Immediately after each test, RPE was recorded, and after the test, oxygen uptake was measured for 5 minutes while the subject sat in an upright position on a chair.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the comparison of different soccer-specific maximal actions upon physiological and perceptual responses and accelerometer load, this study found that the total accelerometer load was lowest in Sprint and Sprint COD conditions, although the physiological (oxygen uptake and heart rate) and perceptual (RPE) responses were highest in the respective conditions. The Jump condition experienced lower RPE than Sprint and Sprint COD but achieved the highest accelerometer load.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Accelerometer load is not a valid measurement for energy costs or RPE but may function as a complementary tool to investigate the player loads during matches and training.</p>","PeriodicalId":51644,"journal":{"name":"Open Access Journal of Sports Medicine","volume":"9 ","pages":"107-114"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2018-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2147/OAJSM.S167347","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Access Journal of Sports Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/OAJSM.S167347","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2018/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to compare the effect of different soccer-specific maximal actions (Continuous run, Sprint, Sprint with change of direction [Sprint COD], Jump and Shot) upon physiological (oxygen uptake and heart rate) and perceptual (rating of perceived exertion [RPE]) responses and accelerometer load.

Materials and methods: Ten moderately to well-trained male soccer players volunteered to serve as subjects in this study. A repeated within-subject design was used in which each subject was tested on five occasions on different days, one test each day, during a period of 2 weeks. Each of the five tests had a distance of 900 m and lasted 5 minutes, thus the mean speed for all five tests was 3 m/s. During the test, oxygen uptake, heart rate and accelerometer load were measured. Immediately after each test, RPE was recorded, and after the test, oxygen uptake was measured for 5 minutes while the subject sat in an upright position on a chair.

Results: In the comparison of different soccer-specific maximal actions upon physiological and perceptual responses and accelerometer load, this study found that the total accelerometer load was lowest in Sprint and Sprint COD conditions, although the physiological (oxygen uptake and heart rate) and perceptual (RPE) responses were highest in the respective conditions. The Jump condition experienced lower RPE than Sprint and Sprint COD but achieved the highest accelerometer load.

Conclusion: Accelerometer load is not a valid measurement for energy costs or RPE but may function as a complementary tool to investigate the player loads during matches and training.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
不同足球专项最大动作对生理、知觉和加速度计测量负荷的影响。
背景:本研究的目的是比较不同的足球特定的最大动作(连续跑、冲刺、改变方向的冲刺[冲刺COD]、跳跃和投篮)对生理(摄氧量和心率)和知觉(感知用力等级[RPE])反应和加速度计负荷的影响。材料与方法:以10名受过中等至良好训练的男子足球运动员为研究对象。采用重复的受试者设计,在两周的时间内,每个受试者在不同的日子进行五次测试,每天一次测试。5次试验的距离为900 m,每次试验持续5分钟,因此5次试验的平均速度为3 m/s。在测试过程中,测量了摄氧量、心率和加速度计负荷。每次测试结束后,立即记录RPE,测试结束后,受试者在椅子上直立坐5分钟,测量摄氧量。结果:在比较不同足球专项最大动作对生理和知觉反应以及加速度计负荷的影响时,本研究发现,尽管生理(摄氧量和心率)和知觉(RPE)反应在各自的条件下最高,但在冲刺和冲刺COD条件下,总加速度计负荷最低。跳跃条件下的RPE低于Sprint和Sprint COD,但加速度计负载最高。结论:加速度计负荷不是能量消耗或RPE的有效测量,但可以作为调查比赛和训练期间球员负荷的补充工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
Short-Term Intermittent Normobaric Hypoxia Combined with Light Exercise Improves Acclimatization of Cardiorespiratory Function in Inactive Adults. Microbial Champions: The Influence of Gut Microbiota on Athletic Performance via the Gut-Brain Axis. Video Analysis of Elite American Football Athletes During Vertical Jump. Exercise into Pain in Chronic Rotator Cuff-Related Shoulder Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial with 6-Month Follow-Up. Achilles Tendon Pain in Male Professional Football Players - A Prospective Five-Season Study of 88 Injuries from the UEFA Elite Club Injury Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1