性别和器械对卧推速度和最大重复次数的影响

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS ACS Applied Bio Materials Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-26 DOI:10.1055/a-2339-2217
Alejandro Pérez-Castilla, Carlos Martínez-Rubio, Andrés Baena-Raya, David M Díez-Fernández, Alba Hernández-Martínez, Manuel Antonio Rodríguez-Pérez
{"title":"性别和器械对卧推速度和最大重复次数的影响","authors":"Alejandro Pérez-Castilla, Carlos Martínez-Rubio, Andrés Baena-Raya, David M Díez-Fernández, Alba Hernández-Martínez, Manuel Antonio Rodríguez-Pérez","doi":"10.1055/a-2339-2217","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study investigated how equipment and sex affect the prediction accuracy of the maximum number of repetitions performed to failure (RTF) using the fastest mean velocity of the set (MV<sub>fastest</sub>). Sixteen men and twelve women completed four sessions (two using free-weight equipment and two sessions using the Smith machine). Each session involved three sets of repetitions to failure against the 65%, 75%, and 85% of the one-repetition maximum, interspersed by 10-min of rest. The goodness-of-fit of the individualized RTF-MV<sub>fastest</sub> relationships was comparable between both equipment types and sexes (<i>P</i>≥0.510). Moreover, there were not significant differences in the MV<sub>fastest</sub> associated with RTF between equipment types (<i>P</i>≥0.258). However, the MV<sub>fastest</sub> associated with RTF was higher for men than for women in repetitions 6 to 15 (<i>P</i>≤0.043; ES≥0.69). In addition, the absolute errors when predicting RTF showed no significant differences between equipment types and loads (<i>P</i><0.444). Specifically, these RTF estimates were within an acceptable range for men (<2 repetitions), but not for women (≥2 repetitions) (main effect of sex: <i>P</i>≤0.018; ES≥0.58). These findings suggest that individualized RTF-MV<sub>fastest</sub> equations estimate the RTF with an acceptable precision in men during bench press exercises in both equipment types but exhibit lower precision for women.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sex and Equipment Impact on Lifting Velocity and the Maximum Repetitions in Bench Press.\",\"authors\":\"Alejandro Pérez-Castilla, Carlos Martínez-Rubio, Andrés Baena-Raya, David M Díez-Fernández, Alba Hernández-Martínez, Manuel Antonio Rodríguez-Pérez\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-2339-2217\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This study investigated how equipment and sex affect the prediction accuracy of the maximum number of repetitions performed to failure (RTF) using the fastest mean velocity of the set (MV<sub>fastest</sub>). Sixteen men and twelve women completed four sessions (two using free-weight equipment and two sessions using the Smith machine). Each session involved three sets of repetitions to failure against the 65%, 75%, and 85% of the one-repetition maximum, interspersed by 10-min of rest. The goodness-of-fit of the individualized RTF-MV<sub>fastest</sub> relationships was comparable between both equipment types and sexes (<i>P</i>≥0.510). Moreover, there were not significant differences in the MV<sub>fastest</sub> associated with RTF between equipment types (<i>P</i>≥0.258). However, the MV<sub>fastest</sub> associated with RTF was higher for men than for women in repetitions 6 to 15 (<i>P</i>≤0.043; ES≥0.69). In addition, the absolute errors when predicting RTF showed no significant differences between equipment types and loads (<i>P</i><0.444). Specifically, these RTF estimates were within an acceptable range for men (<2 repetitions), but not for women (≥2 repetitions) (main effect of sex: <i>P</i>≤0.018; ES≥0.58). These findings suggest that individualized RTF-MV<sub>fastest</sub> equations estimate the RTF with an acceptable precision in men during bench press exercises in both equipment types but exhibit lower precision for women.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2339-2217\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/26 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2339-2217","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究调查了器械和性别如何影响使用组间最快平均速度(MVfastest)预测最大重复次数(RTF)的准确性。16 名男性和 12 名女性完成了四次训练(两次使用自由重量器械,两次使用史密斯机)。每次训练包括三组重复训练,分别达到单次最大重复量的 65%、75% 和 85%,中间休息 10 分钟。个性化的 RTF-MVfastest 关系的拟合优度在两种设备类型和性别之间具有可比性(P≥0.510)。此外,与 RTF 相关的 MVfastest 在不同设备类型之间没有显著差异(P≥0.258)。然而,在重复 6 至 15 次时,男性与 RTF 相关的最短运动时间高于女性(P≤0.043;ES≥0.69)。此外,预测 RTF 的绝对误差在设备类型和负荷之间没有显著差异(PP≤0.018;ES≥0.58)。这些研究结果表明,在两种器械类型的卧推练习中,个性化的 RTF-MVfastest 方程以可接受的精度估计了男性的 RTF,但女性的精度较低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Sex and Equipment Impact on Lifting Velocity and the Maximum Repetitions in Bench Press.

This study investigated how equipment and sex affect the prediction accuracy of the maximum number of repetitions performed to failure (RTF) using the fastest mean velocity of the set (MVfastest). Sixteen men and twelve women completed four sessions (two using free-weight equipment and two sessions using the Smith machine). Each session involved three sets of repetitions to failure against the 65%, 75%, and 85% of the one-repetition maximum, interspersed by 10-min of rest. The goodness-of-fit of the individualized RTF-MVfastest relationships was comparable between both equipment types and sexes (P≥0.510). Moreover, there were not significant differences in the MVfastest associated with RTF between equipment types (P≥0.258). However, the MVfastest associated with RTF was higher for men than for women in repetitions 6 to 15 (P≤0.043; ES≥0.69). In addition, the absolute errors when predicting RTF showed no significant differences between equipment types and loads (P<0.444). Specifically, these RTF estimates were within an acceptable range for men (<2 repetitions), but not for women (≥2 repetitions) (main effect of sex: P≤0.018; ES≥0.58). These findings suggest that individualized RTF-MVfastest equations estimate the RTF with an acceptable precision in men during bench press exercises in both equipment types but exhibit lower precision for women.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
期刊最新文献
A Systematic Review of Sleep Disturbance in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension. Advancing Patient Education in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension: The Promise of Large Language Models. Anti-Myelin-Associated Glycoprotein Neuropathy: Recent Developments. Approach to Managing the Initial Presentation of Multiple Sclerosis: A Worldwide Practice Survey. Association Between LACE+ Index Risk Category and 90-Day Mortality After Stroke.
×
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