单步和双步上楼梯模式的生理反应。

Abdul Rashid Aziz, Kong Chuan Teh
{"title":"单步和双步上楼梯模式的生理反应。","authors":"Abdul Rashid Aziz,&nbsp;Kong Chuan Teh","doi":"10.2114/jpa.24.253","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The aim of this study was to compare the physiological responses and energy cost between two ascending patterns, the single-step (SS) and the double-step (DS), in climbing a public staircase. In the SS pattern, a person climbs one step at a time whilst in the double-step (DS) pattern, the individual traverses two steps in a single stride. Advocates of each stepping pattern claimed that their type of ascent is physically more taxing and expends more calories. Thirty subjects (10 males and 20 females) climbed a typical 11-storey flat (each step height of 0.15 m, a total of 180 steps and a vertical displacement of 27.0 m). The subjects climbed using either the SS pattern at a tempo of 100 steps x min(-1) or the DS pattern at 50 steps x min(-1). The prescribed stepping frequencies ensured that an equal amount of total work was performed between the SS and DS patterns. The climbing patterns were performed in random order. Physiological measures during the last 30 s of the climbs were used in the comparative analysis. The results showed that ventilation, oxygen uptake and heart rate values were significantly higher (all p < 0.01) in the SS as compared to the DS pattern. However, the caloric expenditure during the SS pattern was calculated to be only marginally higher than the DS pattern. In conclusion, ascending with the SS pattern led to significantly higher physiological responses compared to the DS pattern. The higher calorie expended with the SS compared to the DS pattern was deemed to be of little practical significance.</p>","PeriodicalId":80293,"journal":{"name":"Journal of physiological anthropology and applied human science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2005-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2114/jpa.24.253","citationCount":"17","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Physiological responses to single versus double stepping pattern of ascending the stairs.\",\"authors\":\"Abdul Rashid Aziz,&nbsp;Kong Chuan Teh\",\"doi\":\"10.2114/jpa.24.253\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The aim of this study was to compare the physiological responses and energy cost between two ascending patterns, the single-step (SS) and the double-step (DS), in climbing a public staircase. In the SS pattern, a person climbs one step at a time whilst in the double-step (DS) pattern, the individual traverses two steps in a single stride. Advocates of each stepping pattern claimed that their type of ascent is physically more taxing and expends more calories. Thirty subjects (10 males and 20 females) climbed a typical 11-storey flat (each step height of 0.15 m, a total of 180 steps and a vertical displacement of 27.0 m). The subjects climbed using either the SS pattern at a tempo of 100 steps x min(-1) or the DS pattern at 50 steps x min(-1). The prescribed stepping frequencies ensured that an equal amount of total work was performed between the SS and DS patterns. The climbing patterns were performed in random order. Physiological measures during the last 30 s of the climbs were used in the comparative analysis. The results showed that ventilation, oxygen uptake and heart rate values were significantly higher (all p < 0.01) in the SS as compared to the DS pattern. However, the caloric expenditure during the SS pattern was calculated to be only marginally higher than the DS pattern. In conclusion, ascending with the SS pattern led to significantly higher physiological responses compared to the DS pattern. The higher calorie expended with the SS compared to the DS pattern was deemed to be of little practical significance.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":80293,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of physiological anthropology and applied human science\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2005-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2114/jpa.24.253\",\"citationCount\":\"17\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of physiological anthropology and applied human science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2114/jpa.24.253\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of physiological anthropology and applied human science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2114/jpa.24.253","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

摘要

本研究的目的是比较两种上升模式,单步(SS)和双步(DS)在爬公共楼梯时的生理反应和能量消耗。在SS模式中,一个人一次爬一步,而在双步(DS)模式中,个人在一个跨步中走过两步。每一种步法的拥护者都声称,他们的攀爬方式对身体的消耗更大,消耗的卡路里也更多。30名受试者(10名男性和20名女性)爬上一个典型的11层公寓(每层台阶高度为0.15 m,共180级,垂直位移为27.0 m),受试者采用SS模式以100级x分钟(-1)的速度爬上,或采用DS模式以50级x分钟(-1)的速度爬上。规定的步进频率确保在SS和DS模式之间执行的总工作量相等。攀爬模式是随机进行的。在最后30 s的攀登生理测量用于比较分析。结果表明,与DS模式相比,SS模式的通气量、摄氧量和心率值显著高于DS模式(p < 0.01)。然而,在SS模式计算的热量消耗仅略高于DS模式。综上所述,与DS模式相比,SS模式上升导致的生理反应明显更高。与DS模式相比,SS模式消耗的卡路里更高,被认为没有什么实际意义。
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
Physiological responses to single versus double stepping pattern of ascending the stairs.

The aim of this study was to compare the physiological responses and energy cost between two ascending patterns, the single-step (SS) and the double-step (DS), in climbing a public staircase. In the SS pattern, a person climbs one step at a time whilst in the double-step (DS) pattern, the individual traverses two steps in a single stride. Advocates of each stepping pattern claimed that their type of ascent is physically more taxing and expends more calories. Thirty subjects (10 males and 20 females) climbed a typical 11-storey flat (each step height of 0.15 m, a total of 180 steps and a vertical displacement of 27.0 m). The subjects climbed using either the SS pattern at a tempo of 100 steps x min(-1) or the DS pattern at 50 steps x min(-1). The prescribed stepping frequencies ensured that an equal amount of total work was performed between the SS and DS patterns. The climbing patterns were performed in random order. Physiological measures during the last 30 s of the climbs were used in the comparative analysis. The results showed that ventilation, oxygen uptake and heart rate values were significantly higher (all p < 0.01) in the SS as compared to the DS pattern. However, the caloric expenditure during the SS pattern was calculated to be only marginally higher than the DS pattern. In conclusion, ascending with the SS pattern led to significantly higher physiological responses compared to the DS pattern. The higher calorie expended with the SS compared to the DS pattern was deemed to be of little practical significance.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Plasma leptin levels of elite endurance runners after heavy endurance training. Relationships of anthropometrical parameters and body composition with bone mineral content or density in young women with different levels of physical activity. The practice effect and its difference of the pursuit rotor test with the dominant and non-dominant hands. Effects of chronic NH4Cl dosage and swimming exercise on bone metabolic turnover in rats. Specific physiological responses in women with severe primary dysmenorrhea during the menstrual cycle.
×
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