积极性和消极性恢复对青年男子田径运动员不同间歇时间高强度间歇训练效果的影响

Influence of Active and Passive Recovery on High-intensity Interval Training of Different Interval Duration in Young Male Track and Field Athletes

目的:观察间歇期不同恢复方式[积极性恢复(AR)vs.消极性恢复(PR)]对青年男子田径运动员不同间歇时间高强度间歇训练(HIT)效果的影响并探讨其可能机制。方法:20名青年男子田径运动员通过递增负荷运动实验测试最大摄氧量(VO_(2max))和最大有氧功率(MAP)。受试者以120%MAP强度分别进行短间歇HIT(运动15 s,间歇15 s和30 s)和长间歇HIT(运动15 s,间歇60 s),直至力竭,间歇期分别进行PR(即在功率自行车上休息)和AR(以50%MAP继续蹬车)。测定受试者力竭时间(ET)、摄氧量(VO_2)、心率(HR)和能量代谢率(EMR),利用近红外光谱技术(NIRS)测定股外侧肌肌氧含量的变化。结果:1)15 s短间歇HIT时:ET在PR高于AR(P<0.05),平均摄氧量(VO_(2mean))、EMR以及脱氧血红蛋白平均增加速率(△HHb_(rate))、氧合血红蛋白平均降低速率(△Hb O_(2rate))和组织氧合指数平均降低速率(△TSI_(rate))在PR低于AR(P<0.05)。2)30 s短间歇HIT时:ET在PR高于AR(P<0.05),平均心率(HR_(mean))、EMR以及△HHb_(rate)、△Hb O_(2rate)和△TSI_(rate)在PR低于AR(P<0.05)。3)60 s长间歇HIT时:ET、VO_(2mean)、HR_(mean)和EMR在AR高于PR(P<0.05),△HHb_(rate)、△Hb O_(2rate)和△TSI_(rate)在AR低于PR(P<0.05)。结论:不同恢复手段对HIT训练效果的影响与间歇时间有关。对于短间歇HIT(间歇15~30 s),间歇期进行PR的训练效果优于AR,其机制与PR时耗氧量较少、能量消耗较低、Hb脱氧合速率减慢有关;然而,长间歇HIT(间歇时间60 s)时,间歇期采用AR的效果更佳,其原因在于AR时有氧功率输出增加以及Hb快速再氧合所致。

Abstract： Objective： To observe the influence of different recovery methods [（active recovery （AR） vs. passive recovery （PR）] on high-intensity interval training of different interval duration in young male track and field athletes and investigate the possible mechanism. Methods： Twenty young male track and field athletes performed a graded exercise test to measure maximal oxygen uptake （＇（/O2-x） and maximal aerobic power （MAP）. They conducted short interval HIT （exercise for 15 s, interval for 15 s and 30 s） and long interval HIT （exercise for 15 s, interval for 60 s） to exhaustion respectively, and PR （rest at cycle ergometer） or AR （continued to pedal at 50%MAP） was conducted in interval duration. Exhaust time （ET）, oxygen uptake （VO2）, heart rate （HR） and energy metabolism rate （EMR） were recorded and muscle oxygen content of vastus lateralis measured by near-infrared spectroscopy （NIRS）. Results： 1） In HIT of 15 s interval duration： ET with PR was longer than with AR （P 〈 0.05）, mean VO2 （VO2 ）, EMR, mean rate of increase of deoxyhaemoglobin （△HHbrate）, mean rate of decrease of oxyhaemoglobin （△HbO2rate） and mean rate of decrease of tissue oxygenation index （△TSIrate） with PR were lower than with AR （P 〈 0.05）. 2） In HIT of 30 s interval duration： ET with PR was longer than with AR （P 〈 0.05）, mean HR （HRmean）, EMR, △HHbrate, △HbO2rate and △TSIrate with PR were lower than with AR （P 〈 0.05）. 3） In HIT of 60 s interval duration： ET, VO2mean, HRmean and EMR with AR was higher than with PR （P 〈 0.05）, △HHbrate, AHbO2rate and △TSIrate with AR were lower than with PR （P 〈 0.05）. Conclusion： Effects of different recovery mode on HIT related with interval durationl As for short interval （15 - 30 s） HIT, PR in interval duration had advantage over AR, and the possible mechanisms were related with lower oxygen uptake and energy expenditure, as well as lower rate of deoxygenation in PR; however, AR in interval duration was more effective than PR in long interval （60 s） HIT, the reason of which might be committed to higher aerobic power output and faster reoxygenation of haemoglobin.