4.4 Article

The repeated bout effect of typical lower body strength training sessions on sub-maximal running performance and hormonal response

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSIOLOGY
卷 115, 期 8, 页码 1789-1799

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00421-015-3159-z

关键词

Running economy; Strength training; Resistance training; Muscle damage; Hormones

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study examined the effects of two typical strength training sessions performed 1 week apart (i.e. repeated bout effect) on sub-maximal running performance and hormonal. Fourteen resistance-untrained men (age 24.0 +/- A 3.9 years; height 1.83 +/- A 0.11 m; body mass 77.4 +/- A 14.0 kg; VOpeak 48.1 +/- A 6.1 M kg(-1) min(-1)) undertook two bouts of high-intensity strength training sessions (i.e. six-repetition maximum). Creatine kinase (CK), delayed-onset muscle soreness (DOMS), counter-movement jump (CMJ) as well as concentrations of serum testosterone, cortisol and testosterone/cortisol ratio (T/C) were examined prior to and immediately post, 24 (T24) and 48 (T48) h post each strength training bout. Sub-maximal running performance was also conducted at T24 and T48 of each bout. When measures were compared between bouts at T48, the degree of elevation in CK (-58.4 +/- A 55.6 %) and DOMS (-31.43 +/- A 42.9 %) and acute reduction in CMJ measures (4.1 +/- A 5.4 %) were attenuated (p < 0.05) following the second bout. Cortisol was increased until T24 (p < 0.05) although there were no differences between bouts and no differences were found for testosterone and T/C ratio (p > 0.05). Sub-maximal running performance was impaired until T24, although changes were not attenuated following the second bout. The initial bout appeared to provide protection against a number of muscle damage indicators suggesting a greater need for recovery following the initial session of typical lower body resistance exercises in resistance-untrained men although sub-maximal running should be avoided following the first two sessions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据