不同活化後增能作用對國中划船選手測功儀運動表現以及肌肉氧飽和濃度之影響

Abstract

目的：探討不同活化後增能作用對國中划船選手室內划船成績表現以及肌肉氧飽和濃度之影響。方法：本研究共招募11名有划船經驗之國中男子選手 (身高：1.70 ± 0.08公尺，體重：61.3 ± 10.0公斤，年齡：14.4 ± 0.5歲)，事先完成熟悉實驗，以隨機方式進行3種不同熱身處理後進行1,000-m的划船測功儀計時測驗，其中包含標準化的划船熱身，於划船測功儀上進行2分鐘，每分鐘20槳的熱身 (control, CON)，標準化的划船熱身再加上5組5秒的最大等長的熱身 (isometric induced treatment, IMT) 或標準化熱身再加上5下1組的深跳 (plyometric induced treatment, PYT)，每次測驗間間隔至少48小時。測驗期間，實驗參與者在右大腿股外側肌上配戴近紅外線光譜儀 (near-infrared spectroscopy, NIRS) 監測去氧血紅素 ([HHb]) 以及組織氧合指標 (TSI%)。以重複量數單因子變異數分析考驗3種不同熱身間運動表現的差異，以及運動2因子變異數分析考驗NIRS的變項，當統計水準p< .05時，則以Bonferroni法進行事後比較。結果：進行IMT以及PYT熱身處理後，能夠顯著提升1,000公尺室內划船計時測驗中的前500公尺之分段時間 (CON處理 vs. IMT處理 vs. PYT處理，110.2 ± 5.1秒vs. 108.8 ± 4.9秒 vs. 106.9 ± 4.9秒，p = .006) 以及平均輸出功率 (CON處理 vs. IMT處理 vs. PYT處理，267 ± 46 W vs. 277 ± 39 W vs. 296 ± 46 W，p = .000)。此外，PYT處理的前500公尺之平均輸出功率也顯著高於IMT處理 (p = .020)。另一方面，PYT於1,000公尺全段平均輸出功率顯著高於IMT處理 (p = .005) 以及 CON處理 (p = .017)。然而，肌肉氧飽和度相關指標，在各處理間並未發現統計上的差異。結論：於標準化的划船熱身後加入最大等長以及增強式跳躍的熱身方式，可能可以提升輸出功率以及運動表現。Purpose: To investigate the influences of two different post-activation potentiation condition on indoor rowing performance and muscular oxygenation. Methods: Eleven male junior high school rowers were voluntarily recruited in this study. After a familiar session, each participant was asked to perform three different types of warm-up procedures including a 2 min rowing warm-up on rowing ergometer with 20 strokes per minutes only (control, CON) or a rowing warm-up combined with a series of isometric conditioning contractions (5 sets of 5 seconds) (isometric induced treatment, IMT) or combined with a series of depth jumps (1 sets of 5 jumps) (plyometric induced treatment, PYT). The 1,000-m rowing ergometer time trial was performed after each warm-up condition which separated by at least 48 hours. During the trial near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) was used to monitor concentrations deoxy-haemoglobin ([HHb]), and tissue saturation index (TSI) (%) in the right vastus lateralis muscle. The one-way repeated-measures ANOVA were used to determine the differences of rowing performance among three different warm-up procedures. And two-way ANOVA were used to determine the differences of NIRS among three different warm-up procedures and time. Statistical significance was set to p< .05, and followed by a post hoc Bonferroni test. Results: The 500m spilt time in IMT and PYT condition were significantly faster than that in CON (CON vs. IMT vs. PYT，110.2 ± 5.1s vs. 108.8 ± 4.9s vs. 106.9 ± 4.9s, p = .006). The 500 m mean power output in IMT and PYT condition were significantly higher than that in CON (CON vs. IMT vs. PYT，267 ± 46 W vs. 277 ± 39 W vs. 296 ± 46 W, p = .000). The 500 m mean power output in PYT condition were significantly higher than that in IMT (p = .020). Moreover, 1,000 m mean power output in PYT condition were significantly higher than that in IMT (p = .005). However, muscular oxygenation measured by NIRS was found had significant difference among three conditions. Conclusion: A basic rowing warm-up combined a series of isometric conditioning contractions or a series of depth jumps might enhance the split time and mean power output of rowing ergometer performance.