低强度限血训练对健康中年女性肌肉体积、力量和力量的影响

B. Jeon
{"title":"低强度限血训练对健康中年女性肌肉体积、力量和力量的影响","authors":"B. Jeon","doi":"10.15758/ajk.2022.24.4.34","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVES The purpose of this study is to investigate the efficacy of weight training with controlled blood flow occlusion compared to conventional resistance training, in the ageing population.METHODS Twenty-three healthy female subjects (aged 40-55) were randomly assigned to one of three groups; low intensity blood flow restriction training (LI-BFRT) (n = 9), conventional resistance training (RT) (n = 7) and control (CON) (n = 7). The RT group trained between 65-70% one repetition maximum (1RM) and the LI-BFRT group trained at 30% 1RM while wearing pressure cuffs inflated to 100-120% of brachial systolic blood pressure (bSBP). Relative appendicular skeletal muscle mass (ASM/weight), isokinetic strength and power were tested pre and post 8 weeks of training.RESULTS Upper limb ASM/weight increased significantly in the LI-BFRT and RT groups (both p < 0.001). Only LI-BFRT showed significant difference compared with the CON group (p < 0.01). Lower limb ASM/weight improved in both the LI-BFRT (p < 0.01) and CON (p < 0.01) groups without group differences. Lower limb flexion strength increased in the LI-BFRT and RT groups (both p < 0.01), with differences between groups (p < 0.01, LI-BFRT > RT > CON). Only RT increased extension muscle strength (p < 0.05). Lower limb flexion and extension power improved following LI-BFRT (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively), significantly greater than RT in both flexion (p < 0.001) and extension (p < 0.01).CONCLUSIONS LI-BFRT may be as, if not more effective than RT for increasing muscle volume, strength and power in middle-aged women.","PeriodicalId":22264,"journal":{"name":"The Asian Journal of Kinesiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effects of Low Intensity Blood Flow Restriction Training on Muscle Volume, Strength and Power in Healthy Middle-Aged Females\",\"authors\":\"B. Jeon\",\"doi\":\"10.15758/ajk.2022.24.4.34\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"OBJECTIVES The purpose of this study is to investigate the efficacy of weight training with controlled blood flow occlusion compared to conventional resistance training, in the ageing population.METHODS Twenty-three healthy female subjects (aged 40-55) were randomly assigned to one of three groups; low intensity blood flow restriction training (LI-BFRT) (n = 9), conventional resistance training (RT) (n = 7) and control (CON) (n = 7). The RT group trained between 65-70% one repetition maximum (1RM) and the LI-BFRT group trained at 30% 1RM while wearing pressure cuffs inflated to 100-120% of brachial systolic blood pressure (bSBP). Relative appendicular skeletal muscle mass (ASM/weight), isokinetic strength and power were tested pre and post 8 weeks of training.RESULTS Upper limb ASM/weight increased significantly in the LI-BFRT and RT groups (both p < 0.001). Only LI-BFRT showed significant difference compared with the CON group (p < 0.01). Lower limb ASM/weight improved in both the LI-BFRT (p < 0.01) and CON (p < 0.01) groups without group differences. Lower limb flexion strength increased in the LI-BFRT and RT groups (both p < 0.01), with differences between groups (p < 0.01, LI-BFRT > RT > CON). Only RT increased extension muscle strength (p < 0.05). Lower limb flexion and extension power improved following LI-BFRT (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively), significantly greater than RT in both flexion (p < 0.001) and extension (p < 0.01).CONCLUSIONS LI-BFRT may be as, if not more effective than RT for increasing muscle volume, strength and power in middle-aged women.\",\"PeriodicalId\":22264,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Asian Journal of Kinesiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Asian Journal of Kinesiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15758/ajk.2022.24.4.34\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Asian Journal of Kinesiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15758/ajk.2022.24.4.34","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究的目的是研究在老年人群中,与传统阻力训练相比,控制血流量闭塞的重量训练的效果。方法23名健康女性(40 ~ 55岁)随机分为3组;低强度血流限制训练(LI-BFRT) (n = 9)、常规阻力训练(RT) (n = 7)和对照组(CON) (n = 7)。RT组在65-70%的单次最大重复(1RM)之间训练,LI-BFRT组在30%的单次最大重复(1RM)之间训练,同时佩戴膨胀至100-120%肱收缩压(bSBP)的压力袖带。在训练前和训练后分别测试相对阑尾骨骼肌质量(ASM/weight)、等速力量和功率。结果LI-BFRT组和RT组上肢ASM/体重显著增加(p < 0.001)。仅LI-BFRT组与CON组比较差异有统计学意义(p < 0.01)。LI-BFRT组和CON组下肢ASM/体重均有改善(p < 0.01),但组间无差异。LI-BFRT组和RT组下肢屈曲强度升高(p < 0.01),组间差异(p < 0.01, LI-BFRT > RT > CON)。只有RT能增加伸展肌力量(p < 0.05)。LI-BFRT后下肢屈曲和伸展能力均有改善(p < 0.05和p < 0.01),屈曲和伸展能力均显著高于RT (p < 0.001)。结论LI-BFRT在增加中年女性肌肉体积、力量和力量方面可能与RT一样有效。
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
Effects of Low Intensity Blood Flow Restriction Training on Muscle Volume, Strength and Power in Healthy Middle-Aged Females
OBJECTIVES The purpose of this study is to investigate the efficacy of weight training with controlled blood flow occlusion compared to conventional resistance training, in the ageing population.METHODS Twenty-three healthy female subjects (aged 40-55) were randomly assigned to one of three groups; low intensity blood flow restriction training (LI-BFRT) (n = 9), conventional resistance training (RT) (n = 7) and control (CON) (n = 7). The RT group trained between 65-70% one repetition maximum (1RM) and the LI-BFRT group trained at 30% 1RM while wearing pressure cuffs inflated to 100-120% of brachial systolic blood pressure (bSBP). Relative appendicular skeletal muscle mass (ASM/weight), isokinetic strength and power were tested pre and post 8 weeks of training.RESULTS Upper limb ASM/weight increased significantly in the LI-BFRT and RT groups (both p < 0.001). Only LI-BFRT showed significant difference compared with the CON group (p < 0.01). Lower limb ASM/weight improved in both the LI-BFRT (p < 0.01) and CON (p < 0.01) groups without group differences. Lower limb flexion strength increased in the LI-BFRT and RT groups (both p < 0.01), with differences between groups (p < 0.01, LI-BFRT > RT > CON). Only RT increased extension muscle strength (p < 0.05). Lower limb flexion and extension power improved following LI-BFRT (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively), significantly greater than RT in both flexion (p < 0.001) and extension (p < 0.01).CONCLUSIONS LI-BFRT may be as, if not more effective than RT for increasing muscle volume, strength and power in middle-aged 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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
30
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊最新文献
Philosophical Analysis of the Name of the Discipline ‘Physical Education’ and Proposal of Alternative Terminology Effects of Regular Aerobic Exercise on Cardiovascular Health Factors and Heart Function in Sedentary Male Office Workers The Reflection on the Originality of the Study of Physical Education, Health and Sport Sciences in Japan Introduction for Proceedings of a Panel Discussion on an Alternative Name of Physical Education in the East Asian Cultural Sphere Reconsidering the Hierarchy and Translation of “Physical Education/Sports” Related Terms: Taiwan Perspective
×
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