運動訓練類型對運動後過攝氧量之影響

The effects of training types on excess post-exercise oxygen consumption

劉禎忠(Chen-Chung Liu) ； 楊美鈴(Mei-Ling Yang) ； 吳柏翰(Bo-Han, Wu)

《運動表現期刊》 6卷2期 (2019/09) Pp. 49-57

https://doi.org/10.3966/240996512019090602001

摘要

緒論：先前研究運動後過攝氧量（Excess post-exercise oxygen consumption, EPOC）的文獻中，可以發現阻力運動比耐力運動在運動後恢復期能產生更多EPOC，依據不同強度所產生的消耗量亦有差異，然而混合式運動－CrossFit的訓練中包含耐力運動及阻力運動，因此，本研究旨在探討ACSM建議之有氧運動、阻力運動以及CrossFit運動對EPOC的影響。方法：本研究以9名男性作為受試者，以對抗平衡次序設計完成有氧訓練（75%～85%保留心跳率跑步30分鐘,N=9）、阻力運動（3組；4項動作；8RM；每組休息3分鐘,N=9）及CrossFit運動（5次Pull-ups、10次Push-ups、15次Squats；循環持續20分鐘,N=9）。訓練後收集受試者60分鐘的EPOC數據，以重複量數二因子變異數分析（two-way ANOVA, repeated measures）進行統計處理。結果：經研究結果顯示阻力運動與CrossFit運動在運動後15和30分鐘的EPOC皆顯著高於有氧運動（p＜.05），在運動後45分鐘和60分鐘的EPOC，僅有CrossFit運動持續顯著高於有氧運動（p＜.05），阻力運動與有氧運動間並沒有顯著差異。結論：本研究結果發現CrossFit運動所產生的EPOC效果最佳，其次是阻力運動以及有氧運動。

關鍵字

阻力運動 ； 有氧運動 ； 混合健身

並列摘要

Introduction: For the literature on excess post-exercise oxygen consumption (EPOC), resistance exercise could have more EPOC than aerobic exercise. But difference of intensity and exercise types has difference energy consumption. However, CrossFit contained aerobic exercise and resistance exercise. Therefore, the purpose of this study was compared to the ACSM recommended aerobic exercise, resistance exercise and CrossFit on excess post-exercise oxygen consumption. Methods: Nine men were participants. Participants completed three trials conditions in a random order: 1) endurance training (EE; performed on treadmill; 75% ~ 85% HRR for 20 min), resistance training (RE; performed 3 sets of 8 repetitions of 4 exercises at 80% of 8 repetitions maximum) or CrossFit training (CF; Cindy-5 pull-up, 10 push-up and 15). After exercise, were collected the EPOC for 60 minutes. This study were used the two-way ANOVA (repeated measures) for statistical analysis. Results: The results showed that resistance exercise and CrossFit were significantly higher than aerobic exercise (p ＜.05) at accumulated 15 and 30 minutes of EPOC, and in the accumulated oxygen uptake after 45 and 60 minutes of CrossFit was significantly higher than aerobic exercise (p ＜.05), and resistance exercise was not significantly different in CrossFit. Conclusions: The results of this study showed that the CrossFit produced the best for EPOC. Secondly was resistance exercise. Aerobic exercise was produced less for EPOC in this study.

並列關鍵字

resistance exercise ； aerobic exercise ； CrossFit exercise

參考文獻

方淑卿、林瑞興（2007）。步行運動對肥胖者體脂肪之影響，中華體育季刊，21（2），1-7。

何伯瑋、陳裕鏞（2009）。運動後過攝氧量之探討，體育學系系刊，9，103-116。

吳汶蘭、張志仲、郭藍遠、林槐庭、陳勝凱（2008）。相同心跳率強度下不同運動模式之運動後過攝氧量比較，物理治療，33（2），87-93。

徐志翔、林貴福（2009）。以運動後過攝氧量探討分散式與連續式運動的能量消耗，大專體育，102，196-201。

張弘文、包怡芬（2003）。運動與體重控制，大專體育，69，162-166。