4.4 Article

MUSCLE DAMAGE RESPONSE IN FEMALE COLLEGIATE ATHLETES AFTER REPEATED SPRINT ACTIVITY

期刊

JOURNAL OF STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING RESEARCH
卷 29, 期 10, 页码 2802-2807

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000000961

关键词

females; muscle function; recovery; exercise-induced muscle damage

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Keane, KM, Salicki, R, Goodall, S, Thomas, K, and Howatson, G. Muscle damage response in female collegiate athletes after repeated sprint activity. J Strength Cond Res 29(10): 2802-2807, 2015Exercise-induced muscle damage (EIMD) is a well-investigated area, however there is a paucity of data surrounding the damage response in females. The aim of this study was to examine the damage responses from a sport-specific bout of repeated sprints in female athletes. Eleven well-trained females (mean +/- SD; age: 22 +/- 3 years; height: 166.6 +/- 5.7 cm; mass: 62.7 +/- 4.5 kg) in the luteal phase of the menstrual cycle completed a repeated sprint protocol designed to induce EIMD (15 x 30 m sprints). Creatine kinase, countermovement jump height, knee extensor maximal voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) force, delayed onset muscle soreness (DOMS), 30-m sprint time, and limb girth were recorded before, after, 24, 48, and 72 hours after exercise. Creatine kinase was elevated at 24, 48, and 72 hours (p 0.05), peaking at 24 hours (+418%) and returning toward baseline at 72 hours. Countermovement jump height was reduced immediately after, 24, and 48 hours (p 0.05). Sprint performance was also negatively affected immediately after, 24, 48, and 72 hours after exercise. Muscle soreness peaked at 48 hours (p < 0.01) and remained significantly elevated at 72 hours after exercise (p < 0.01). Limb girth and MVIC did not alter over time. This study provides new information on the EIMD response in trained females after a sport-specific bout of repeated sprints. Importantly, this damage response has the potential to negatively affect performance for several days after exercise.

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