Arthur Henrique Bossi , Wouter Timmerman , Diana Cole , Louis Passfield , James Hopker
{"title":"德尔塔概念并不能有效地使竭尽全力的间歇训练的运动反应正常化","authors":"Arthur Henrique Bossi , Wouter Timmerman , Diana Cole , Louis Passfield , James Hopker","doi":"10.1016/j.jsams.2024.07.019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>This study was designed to quantify inter- and intra-individual variability in performance, physiological, and perceptual responses to high-intensity interval training prescribed using the percentage of delta (%Δ) method, in which the gas exchange threshold and maximal oxygen uptake (V̇O<sub>2max</sub>) are taken into account to normalise relative exercise intensity.</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>Repeated-measures, within-subjects design with mixed-effects modelling.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Eighteen male and four female cyclists (age: 36 ± 12 years, height: 178 ± 10 cm, body mass: 75.2 ± 13.7 kg, V̇O<sub>2max</sub>: 51.6 ± 5.3 ml·kg<sup>−1</sup>·min<sup>−1</sup>) undertook an incremental test to exhaustion to determine the gas exchange threshold and V̇O<sub>2max</sub> as prescription benchmarks. On separate occasions, participants then completed four high-intensity interval training sessions of identical intensity (70 %Δ) and format (4-min on, 2-min off); all performed to exhaustion. Acute high-intensity interval training responses were modelled with participant as a random effect to provide estimates of inter- and intra-individual variability.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Greater variability was generally observed at the between- compared with the within-individual level, ranging from 50 % to 89 % and from 11 % to 50 % of the total variability, respectively. For the group mean time to exhaustion of 20.3 min, inter- and intra-individual standard deviations reached 9.3 min (coefficient of variation = 46 %) and 4.5 min (coefficient of variation = 22 %), respectively.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Due to the high variability observed, the %Δ method does not effectively normalise the relative intensity of exhaustive high-intensity interval training across individuals. The generally larger inter- versus intra-individual variability suggests that day-to-day biological fluctuations and/or measurement errors cannot explain the identified shortcoming of the method.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16992,"journal":{"name":"Journal of science and medicine in sport","volume":"27 12","pages":"Pages 875-882"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The delta concept does not effectively normalise exercise responses to exhaustive interval training\",\"authors\":\"Arthur Henrique Bossi , Wouter Timmerman , Diana Cole , Louis Passfield , James Hopker\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jsams.2024.07.019\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>This study was designed to quantify inter- and intra-individual variability in performance, physiological, and perceptual responses to high-intensity interval training prescribed using the percentage of delta (%Δ) method, in which the gas exchange threshold and maximal oxygen uptake (V̇O<sub>2max</sub>) are taken into account to normalise relative exercise intensity.</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>Repeated-measures, within-subjects design with mixed-effects modelling.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Eighteen male and four female cyclists (age: 36 ± 12 years, height: 178 ± 10 cm, body mass: 75.2 ± 13.7 kg, V̇O<sub>2max</sub>: 51.6 ± 5.3 ml·kg<sup>−1</sup>·min<sup>−1</sup>) undertook an incremental test to exhaustion to determine the gas exchange threshold and V̇O<sub>2max</sub> as prescription benchmarks. On separate occasions, participants then completed four high-intensity interval training sessions of identical intensity (70 %Δ) and format (4-min on, 2-min off); all performed to exhaustion. Acute high-intensity interval training responses were modelled with participant as a random effect to provide estimates of inter- and intra-individual variability.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Greater variability was generally observed at the between- compared with the within-individual level, ranging from 50 % to 89 % and from 11 % to 50 % of the total variability, respectively. For the group mean time to exhaustion of 20.3 min, inter- and intra-individual standard deviations reached 9.3 min (coefficient of variation = 46 %) and 4.5 min (coefficient of variation = 22 %), respectively.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Due to the high variability observed, the %Δ method does not effectively normalise the relative intensity of exhaustive high-intensity interval training across individuals. The generally larger inter- versus intra-individual variability suggests that day-to-day biological fluctuations and/or measurement errors cannot explain the identified shortcoming of the method.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16992,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of science and medicine in sport\",\"volume\":\"27 12\",\"pages\":\"Pages 875-882\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of science and medicine in sport\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1440244024002603\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SPORT SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of science and medicine in sport","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1440244024002603","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
The delta concept does not effectively normalise exercise responses to exhaustive interval training
Objectives
This study was designed to quantify inter- and intra-individual variability in performance, physiological, and perceptual responses to high-intensity interval training prescribed using the percentage of delta (%Δ) method, in which the gas exchange threshold and maximal oxygen uptake (V̇O2max) are taken into account to normalise relative exercise intensity.
Design
Repeated-measures, within-subjects design with mixed-effects modelling.
Methods
Eighteen male and four female cyclists (age: 36 ± 12 years, height: 178 ± 10 cm, body mass: 75.2 ± 13.7 kg, V̇O2max: 51.6 ± 5.3 ml·kg−1·min−1) undertook an incremental test to exhaustion to determine the gas exchange threshold and V̇O2max as prescription benchmarks. On separate occasions, participants then completed four high-intensity interval training sessions of identical intensity (70 %Δ) and format (4-min on, 2-min off); all performed to exhaustion. Acute high-intensity interval training responses were modelled with participant as a random effect to provide estimates of inter- and intra-individual variability.
Results
Greater variability was generally observed at the between- compared with the within-individual level, ranging from 50 % to 89 % and from 11 % to 50 % of the total variability, respectively. For the group mean time to exhaustion of 20.3 min, inter- and intra-individual standard deviations reached 9.3 min (coefficient of variation = 46 %) and 4.5 min (coefficient of variation = 22 %), respectively.
Conclusions
Due to the high variability observed, the %Δ method does not effectively normalise the relative intensity of exhaustive high-intensity interval training across individuals. The generally larger inter- versus intra-individual variability suggests that day-to-day biological fluctuations and/or measurement errors cannot explain the identified shortcoming of the method.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport is the official journal of Sports Medicine Australia (SMA) and is an an international refereed research publication covering all aspects of sport science and medicine.
The Journal considers for publication Original research and Review papers in the sub-disciplines relating generally to the broad sports medicine and sports science fields: sports medicine, sports injury (including injury epidemiology and injury prevention), physiotherapy, podiatry, physical activity and health, sports science, biomechanics, exercise physiology, motor control and learning, sport and exercise psychology, sports nutrition, public health (as relevant to sport and exercise), and rehabilitation and injury management. Manuscripts with an interdisciplinary perspective with specific applications to sport and exercise and its interaction with health will also be considered.