共查询到19条相似文献，搜索用时 109 毫秒
1.
2.
《体育科技文献通报》2001,(8)
G804.2 20014189电刺激方法对肌肉力量与柔韧性的影响=Effectsof muscle strength and flexibility by theelectrical stimulation[刊,中.I]/黄志刚,周里,吕养民,刘涛∥西安体育学院学报.-2000.-17(4).-93-95表4参18(XH)电刺激∥肌肉∥肌肉力量∥柔韧性∥影响电刺激训练已成为现代运动训练的重要手段之一。众多资料表明,电刺激可有效的发展肌肉力量。本研究旨在发展肌肉力量的同时,观察其柔韧性的 相似文献
3.
电刺激方法对肌肉力量与柔韧性的影响 总被引：2，自引：0，他引：2
电刺激训练已成为现代运动训练的重要手段之一。众多资料表明 ,电刺激可有效的发展肌肉力量。本研究旨在发展肌肉力量的同时 ,观察其柔韧性的变化。结果表明 ,电刺激训练可显著地提高原动肌肌群和对抗肌肌群肌肉的力量 ,亦可有效的提高肌肉的柔韧性 ,保证肌肉力量与柔韧性同步协调平衡发展 相似文献
4.
《体育科技文献通报》1999,(8)
G804.63 9903363电刺激方法对肌肉力量、柔韧性及综合效果研究现状分析=Analysis on current research situation ofhow electric stimulation influences musclestrength and flexibility[刊,中,I]/黄志刚,周里,王煜∥西安体育学院学报.-1999.-16(2).-74-76参19(YYW)电刺激∥肌肉力量∥柔韧性∥效果电刺激方法已成为现代运动训练的重要手段之一。但电刺激在发展肌肉力量的同时对柔韧性的影响还有待进一步研究。对电刺激在发展肌肉力量及电刺激对柔韧性的影响和柔韧性的训练方法等方法作了比较全面的综述,以期为进一步的研究提供参考。 相似文献
5.
电刺激方法对肌肉力量、柔韧性及综合效果研究现状分析 总被引：2，自引：1，他引：1
电刺激方法已成为现代运动训练的重要手段之一。但电刺激在发展肌肉力量的同时对柔韧性的影响还有待进一步研究。对电刺激在发展肌肉力量及电刺激对柔韧性的影响和柔韧性的训练方法等方面作了比较全面的综述,以期为进一步的研究提供参考。 相似文献
6.
分别对15名运动员进行了电刺激增长肌肉力量的观察与实验。看出: 在训练之后进行电刺激,肌肉力量增长25.6％,训练之前(非训练日)进行电刺激肌肉力量增长8.1％,对照组只增长6％。训练(疲劳)加电刺激的效果较好。在肌肉力量明显增长的情况下,弹跳、速度提高也较多,运动技术也有改进,相应的运动成绩也有所提高。在我们观察的条件下看出:电刺激促使肌力增长的时间与仃止刺激后肌力消退的时间大体相等。多数受试运动员反映,经过电刺激后体力恢复较好。我们认为训练后进行电刺激,对局(?)肌肉来说是个大运动量训练,对整体来说又是个恢复手段。此法既是训练手段,也是治疗方法。 相似文献
7.
本文就目前国外肌肉力量训练引起肌肉损伤与酸痛的机制,骨骼肌力量电刺激训练法的最新研究现状及成果进行综述,供读者参考。 相似文献
8.
关于电刺激方法发展肌力的综述 总被引：3，自引：1，他引：2
<正> 电刺激方法在医学(主要是理疗学)用于发展肌肉力量已有很多年历史。例如,对手术或受伤后肌肉萎缩的治疗,瘫痪肌肉的恢复等等。而用于运动员正常肌肉力量发展是从70年代才开始的。由于电刺激方法发展肌肉力量与传统方法相比具有:能使肌肉最大限度地活跃起来;引起肌肉紧张所维持时间长,反复次数多,极限力量下降慢,由于排除了中枢神经系统的疲劳,使运动员在已感疲劳后仍可继续对肌肉进行电刺激训练,达到真正大运动量训练目的;消耗能量少;肌肉训练的针对性强等特点。所以美国、苏联、西德、 相似文献
9.
前臂屈肌群电刺激训练前后的力量变化及对伸肌群力量的影响 总被引：3，自引：0，他引：3
王琨 《上海体育学院学报》1992,(2)
采用电刺激训练前后力量测试的方法,获得了前臂屈肌群的最大等长力量、一般力量、爆发力和肌肉耐力的变化数据,分析和探讨了电刺激训练前臂屈肌群对其伸肌力量的作用,为科学地应用电刺激训练法提高肌肉力量,提供一定的依据。 相似文献
10.
11.
Mikkola J Vesterinen V Taipale R Capostagno B Häkkinen K Nummela A 《Journal of sports sciences》2011,29(13):1359-1371
The purpose of this study was to assess the effects of heavy resistance, explosive resistance, and muscle endurance training on neuromuscular, endurance, and high-intensity running performance in recreational endurance runners. Twenty-seven male runners were divided into one of three groups: heavy resistance, explosive resistance or muscle endurance training. After 6 weeks of preparatory training, the groups underwent an 8-week resistance training programme as a supplement to endurance training. Before and after the 8-week training period, maximal strength (one-repetition maximum), electromyographic activity of the leg extensors, countermovement jump height, maximal speed in the maximal anaerobic running test, maximal endurance performance, maximal oxygen uptake ([V·]O(?max)), and running economy were assessed. Maximal strength improved in the heavy (P = 0.034, effect size ES = 0.38) and explosive resistance training groups (P = 0.003, ES = 0.67) with increases in leg muscle activation (heavy: P = 0.032, ES = 0.38; explosive: P = 0.002, ES = 0.77). Only the heavy resistance training group improved maximal running speed in the maximal anaerobic running test (P = 0.012, ES = 0.52) and jump height (P = 0.006, ES = 0.59). Maximal endurance running performance was improved in all groups (heavy: P = 0.005, ES = 0.56; explosive: P = 0.034, ES = 0.39; muscle endurance: P = 0.001, ES = 0.94), with small though not statistically significant improvements in [V·]O(?max) (heavy: ES = 0.08; explosive: ES = 0.29; muscle endurance: ES = 0.65) and running economy (ES in all groups < 0.08). All three modes of strength training used concurrently with endurance training were effective in improving treadmill running endurance performance. However, both heavy and explosive strength training were beneficial in improving neuromuscular characteristics, and heavy resistance training in particular contributed to improvements in high-intensity running characteristics. Thus, endurance runners should include heavy resistance training in their training programmes to enhance endurance performance, such as improving sprinting ability at the end of a race. 相似文献
12.
Purpose:We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of training to muscle failure or non-failure on muscular strength and hypertrophy.Methods:Meta-analyses of effect sizes(ESs)explored the effects of training to failure vs.non-failure on strength and hypertrophy.Subgroup meta-analyses explored potential moderating effects of variables such as training status(trained vs.untrained),training volume(volume equated vs.volume non-equated),body region(upper vs.lower),exercise selection(multi-vs.single-joint exercises(only for strength)),and study design(independent vs.dependent groups).Results:Fifteen studies were included in the review.All studies included young adults as participants.Meta-analysis indicated no significant difference between the training conditions for muscular strength(ES=-0.09,95%confidence interval(95%CI):-0.22 to 0.05)and for hypertrophy(ES=0.22,95%CI:-0.11 to 0.55).Subgroup analyses that stratified the studies according to body region,exercise selection,or study design showed no significant differences between training conditions.In studies that did not equate training volume between the groups,the analysis showed significant favoring of non-failure training on strength gains(ES=-0.32,95%CI:-0.57 to-0.07).In the subgroup analysis for resistance-trained individuals,the analysis showed a significant effect of training to failure for muscle hypertrophy(ES=0.15,95%CI:0.03-0.26).Conclusion:Training to muscle failure does not seem to be required for gains in strength and muscle size.However,training in this manner does not seem to have detrimental effects on these adaptations,either.More studies should be conducted among older adults and highly trained individuals to improve the generalizability of these findings. 相似文献
13.
《运动与健康科学(英文)》2022,11(6):656-670
BackgroundThere is a growing body of experimental evidence examining the effects of plyometric jump training (PJT) on physical fitness attributes in basketball players; however, this evidence has not yet been comprehensively and systematically aggregated. Therefore, our objective was to meta-analyze the effects of PJT on physical fitness attributes in basketball players, in comparison to a control condition.MethodsA systematic literature search was conducted in the databases PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus, up to July 2020. Peer-reviewed controlled trials with baseline and follow-up measurements investigating the effects of PJT on physical fitness attributes (muscle power, i.e., jumping performance, linear sprint speed, change-of-direction speed, balance, and muscle strength) in basketball players, with no restrictions on their playing level, sex, or age. Hedge's g effect sizes (ES) were calculated for physical fitness variables. Using a random-effects model, potential sources of heterogeneity were selected, including subgroup analyses (age, sex, body mass, and height) and single training factor analysis (program duration, training frequency, and total number of training sessions). Computation of meta-regression was also performed.ResultsThirty-two studies were included, involving 818 total basketball players. Significant (p < 0.05) small-to-large effects of PJT were evident on vertical jump power (ES = 0.45), countermovement jump height with (ES = 1.24) and without arm swing (ES = 0.88), squat jump height (ES = 0.80), drop jump height (ES = 0.53), horizontal jump distance (ES = 0.65), linear sprint time across distances ≤10 m (ES = 1.67) and >10 m (ES = 0.92), change-of-direction performance time across distances ≤40 m (ES = 1.15) and >40 m (ES = 1.02), dynamic (ES = 1.16) and static balance (ES = 1.48), and maximal strength (ES = 0.57). The meta-regression revealed that training duration, training frequency, and total number of sessions completed did not predict the effects of PJT on physical fitness attributes. Subgroup analysis indicated greater improvements in older compared to younger players in horizontal jump distance (>17.15 years, ES = 2.11; ≤17.15 years, ES = 0.10; p < 0.001), linear sprint time >10 m (>16.3 years, ES = 1.83; ≤16.3 years, ES = 0.36; p = 0.010), and change-of-direction performance time ≤40 m (>16.3 years, ES = 1.65; ≤16.3 years, ES = 0.75; p = 0.005). Greater increases in horizontal jump distance were apparent with >2 compared with ≤2 weekly PJT sessions (ES = 2.12 and ES = 0.39, respectively; p < 0.001).ConclusionData from 32 studies (28 of which demonstrate moderate-to-high methodological quality) indicate PJT improves muscle power, linear sprint speed, change-of-direction speed, balance, and muscle strength in basketball players independent of sex, age, or PJT program variables. However, the beneficial effects of PJT as measured by horizontal jump distance, linear sprint time >10 m, and change-of-direction performance time ≤40 m, appear to be more evident among older basketball players. 相似文献
14.
Cintia Barcelos Felipe Damas Sanmy Rocha Nóbrega Carlos Ugrinowitsch Manoel Emílio Lixandrão Lucas Marcelino Eder Dos Santos 《European Journal of Sport Science》2018,18(8):1077-1082
The aim of the study was to compare the effect of resistance training (RT) frequencies of five times (RT5), thrice- (RT3) or twice- (RT2) weekly in muscle strength and hypertrophy in young men. Were used a within-subjects design in which 20 participants had one leg randomly assigned to RT5 and the other to RT3 or to RT2. 1?RM and muscle cross-sectional area (CSA) were assessed at baseline, after four (W4) and eight (W8) RT weeks. RT5 resulted in greater total training volume (TTV) than RT3 and RT2 (P?=?.001). 1?RM increased similarly between protocols at W4 (RT5: 55?±?9?Kg, effect size (ES): 1.18; RT3: 51?±?11?Kg, ES: 0.80; RT2: 54?±?7?Kg, ES: 1.13; P?P?2, ES: 0.54; RT3: 22.0?±?4.6?cm2, ES: 0.19; RT2: ES: 0.25; 23.8?±?3.8?cm2; P?2; ES: 0.69; RT3: 23.6?±?4.2?cm2, ES: 0.58; RT2: 25.5?±?3.7?cm2; ES: 0.70; P?2; RT3: 21.2?±?4.0?cm2; RT2: 22.9?±?3.8?cm2). Performing RT5, RT3 and RT2 a week result in similar muscle strength increase and hypertrophy, despite higher TTV for RT5. 相似文献
15.
Angelo Sabag Abdolrahman Najafi Scott Michael Tuguy Esgin Mark Halaki 《Journal of sports sciences》2018,36(21):2472-2483
The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to assess the effect of concurrent high intensity interval training (HIIT) and resistance training (RT) on strength and hypertrophy. Five electronic databases were searched using terms related to HIIT, RT, and concurrent training. Effect size (ES), calculated as standardised differences in the means, were used to examine the effect of concurrent HIIT and RT compared to RT alone on muscle strength and hypertrophy. Sub-analyses were performed to assess region-specific strength and hypertrophy, HIIT modality (cycling versus running), and inter-modal rest responses. Compared to RT alone, concurrent HIIT and RT led to similar changes in muscle hypertrophy and upper body strength. Concurrent HIIT and RT resulted in a lower increase in lower body strength compared to RT alone (ES = ?0.248, p = 0.049). Sub analyses showed a trend for lower body strength to be negatively affected by cycling HIIT (ES = ?0.377, p = 0.074) and not running (ES = ?0.176, p = 0.261). Data suggests concurrent HIIT and RT does not negatively impact hypertrophy or upper body strength, and that any possible negative effect on lower body strength may be ameliorated by incorporating running based HIIT and longer inter-modal rest periods. 相似文献
16.
Brad J. Schoenfeld Jacob M. Wilson Ryan P. Lowery James W. Krieger 《European Journal of Sport Science》2016,16(1):1-10
There has been much debate as to optimal loading strategies for maximising the adaptive response to resistance exercise. The purpose of this paper therefore was to conduct a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials to compare the effects of low-load (≤60% 1 repetition maximum [RM]) versus high-load (≥65% 1 RM) training in enhancing post-exercise muscular adaptations. The strength analysis comprised 251 subjects and 32 effect sizes (ESs), nested within 20 treatment groups and 9 studies. The hypertrophy analysis comprised 191 subjects and 34 ESs, nested with 17 treatment groups and 8 studies. There was a trend for strength outcomes to be greater with high loads compared to low loads (difference = 1.07 ± 0.60; CI: ?0.18, 2.32; p = 0.09). The mean ES for low loads was 1.23 ± 0.43 (CI: 0.32, 2.13). The mean ES for high loads was 2.30 ± 0.43 (CI: 1.41, 3.19). There was a trend for hypertrophy outcomes to be greater with high loads compared to low loads (difference = 0.43 ± 0.24; CI: ?0.05, 0.92; p = 0.076). The mean ES for low loads was 0.39 ± 0.17 (CI: 0.05, 0.73). The mean ES for high loads was 0.82 ± 0.17 (CI: 0.49, 1.16). In conclusion, training with loads ≤50% 1 RM was found to promote substantial increases in muscle strength and hypertrophy in untrained individuals, but a trend was noted for superiority of heavy loading with respect to these outcome measures with null findings likely attributed to a relatively small number of studies on the topic. 相似文献
17.
Fearghal P. Behan Rachael Moody Tejal Sarika Patel Edward Lattimore Thomas M. Maden-Wilkinson Thomas G. Balshaw 《Journal of sports sciences》2013,31(21):2452-2458
ABSTRACTHamstring strain injury (HSI) rates are higher for males vs. females. This cross-sectional study investigated if inherent differences in biceps femoris long head (BFLH) fascicle length (Lf) exist between recreationally active males and females (i.e., individuals without specific training practice history). Twenty-four young healthy participants (12 males; 12 females) had their BFLH muscle architecture (Lf, pennation angle [θp], and muscle thickness [MT]) measured using B-mode ultrasonography. Eccentric and isometric knee flexion strength were also assessed. BFLH Lf did not differ between sexes when expressed in absolute terms (males, 81.5 ± 14.7 mm; females, 73.6 ± 15.9 mm, P = 0.220, effect size (ES) = 0.52) or relative to femur length (0.140 ≤ P ≤ 0.220, ES = 0.63). Similarly, BFLH θp did not differ between sexes (P = 0.650) but BFLH MT was 18.9% larger for males vs. females (P = 0.024, ES = 0.99). Isometric and eccentric knee flexion strength was greater for males vs. females in absolute terms ([both] P < 0.001, 2.00 ≤ ES ≤ 2.27) and relative to body mass ([both] P < 0.001, 1.93 ≤ ES ≤ 2.13). In conclusion, factors other than BFLH Lf seem likely to be implicated in higher male vs. female HSI rates. 相似文献
18.
Jussi Mikkola Ville Vesterinen Ritva Taipale Benoit Capostagno Keijo Häkkinen Ari Nummela 《Journal of sports sciences》2013,31(13):1359-1371
Abstract The purpose of this study was to assess the effects of heavy resistance, explosive resistance, and muscle endurance training on neuromuscular, endurance, and high-intensity running performance in recreational endurance runners. Twenty-seven male runners were divided into one of three groups: heavy resistance, explosive resistance or muscle endurance training. After 6 weeks of preparatory training, the groups underwent an 8-week resistance training programme as a supplement to endurance training. Before and after the 8-week training period, maximal strength (one-repetition maximum), electromyographic activity of the leg extensors, countermovement jump height, maximal speed in the maximal anaerobic running test, maximal endurance performance, maximal oxygen uptake ([Vdot]O2max), and running economy were assessed. Maximal strength improved in the heavy (P = 0.034, effect size ES = 0.38) and explosive resistance training groups (P = 0.003, ES = 0.67) with increases in leg muscle activation (heavy: P = 0.032, ES = 0.38; explosive: P = 0.002, ES = 0.77). Only the heavy resistance training group improved maximal running speed in the maximal anaerobic running test (P = 0.012, ES = 0.52) and jump height (P = 0.006, ES = 0.59). Maximal endurance running performance was improved in all groups (heavy: P = 0.005, ES = 0.56; explosive: P = 0.034, ES = 0.39; muscle endurance: P = 0.001, ES = 0.94), with small though not statistically significant improvements in [Vdot]O2max (heavy: ES = 0.08; explosive: ES = 0.29; muscle endurance: ES = 0.65) and running economy (ES in all groups < 0.08). All three modes of strength training used concurrently with endurance training were effective in improving treadmill running endurance performance. However, both heavy and explosive strength training were beneficial in improving neuromuscular characteristics, and heavy resistance training in particular contributed to improvements in high-intensity running characteristics. Thus, endurance runners should include heavy resistance training in their training programmes to enhance endurance performance, such as improving sprinting ability at the end of a race. 相似文献
19.
目的:研究前锯肌的力量训练对散打运动员出拳力量的影响。方法:通过以12名散打运动员为实验对象,随机分为实验组和对照组,分别采用传统的力量训练和传统的力量与前锯肌力量结合训练的方式进行8周的实验研究并对其力量训练进行监控,以及运用生物力学等方法对出拳力量进行分析,对实验前后结果进行对比分析。结果:对照组的训练效果呈显著差异(P<0.05),而实验组的训练效果呈非常显著性差异(P<0.01).结论:增强前锯肌的力量训练对运动员的出拳力量有重要的影响。此实验为散打运动员的出拳力量训练提供参考依据。 相似文献