ACUTE AND CHRONIC CARDIOVASCULAR RESPONSE TO 16 WEEKS OF COMBINED ECCENTRIC OR TRADITIONAL RESISTANCE AND AEROBIC TRAINING IN ELDERLY HYPERTENSIVE WOMEN: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
ACUTE AND CHRONIC CARDIOVASCULAR RESPONSE TO 16 WEEKS OF COMBINED ECCENTRIC OR TRADITIONAL RESISTANCE AND AEROBIC TRAINING IN ELDERLY HYPERTENSIVE WOMEN: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
复制标题
DOI：
10.1519/jsc.0000000000000537
复制
发表时间：
2014-11-01
影响因子：
3.2
通讯作者：
Prestes, Jonato
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
dos Santos, Eduardo S.;Asano, Ricardo Y.;Prestes, Jonato
dos桑托斯托斯，ES，Asano，RY，Filho，IG，Lopes，NL，Panelli，P，Nascimento，DdaC，Collier，SR，and Prestes，J. Acute and chronic cardiovascular response to 16 weeks of combined eccentric or traditional resistance and aerobic training in elderly hypertensive women：A randomized controlled trial. J Strength Cond Res 28（11）：3073-3084，2014推荐有氧（AT）和阻力训练（RT）作为预防高血压的非药物治疗。然而，有一个缺乏的文献调查的影响，联合运动模式（RT结合AT）的老年高血压妇女。因此，我们的目的是比较两种方案模型的运动后低血压（PEH）反应，并评估急性和慢性训练后PEH程度之间的相关性。此外，我们还比较了每个训练组的几个生化变量。60名高血压老年女性被随机分配到非运动对照组（整个研究期间没有系统的运动训练）、离心RT（ERT）和传统RT（TRT）。训练计划包括16周的RT结合AT。评价血压（BP）、生化特征和1次最大重复（1 RM）。两种训练方案训练前后的高密度脂蛋白（HDL）均显著增加（ERT +5%和TRT +7%;两者p = 0.001）。收缩压（SBP）（合并ERT-19%和TRT-21%;两者p = 0.001）和舒张压（DBP）（两者-13%;两者p = 0.001）降低。卧推1 RM（合并ERT +54%和TRT +35%;两者p = 0.001）和腿部推举1 RM（合并ERT +52%和TRT +33%;两者p = 0.001）增加。对于ERT联合AT组，急性运动后SBP下降幅度与慢性训练后SBP下降中度相关（r = 0.64）。两种联合训练方案都能有效促进健康相关因素（HDL、SBP、DBP和1 RM）的益处。考虑到联合ERT期间经历的心血管压力较低，这种类型的训练似乎最适合老年人、失调个体和高血压患者。
dos Santos, ES, Asano, RY, Filho, IG, Lopes, NL, Panelli, P, Nascimento, DdaC, Collier, SR, and Prestes, J. Acute and chronic cardiovascular response to 16 weeks of combined eccentric or traditional resistance and aerobic training in elderly hypertensive women: A randomized controlled trial. J Strength Cond Res 28(11): 3073-3084, 2014Both aerobic (AT) and resistance training (RT) are recommended as nonpharmacological treatments to prevent hypertension. However, there is a paucity of literature investigating the effects of combined exercise modes (RT combined with AT) in elderly hypertensive women. Thus, our aim was to compare the postexercise hypotension (PEH) response to both protocol models and to assess the correlation between the degree of PEH after acute and chronic training. Furthermore, we also compared several biochemical variables for each training group. Sixty hypertensive older women were randomly assigned into nonexercised control (no systematic exercise training throughout the study), eccentric RT (ERT), and traditional RT (TRT). The training programs consisted of 16 weeks of RT combined with AT. Blood pressure (BP), biochemical profiles, and 1 repetition maximum (1RM) were evaluated. There was a significant increase in high-density lipoprotein (HDL) after both training regimens pre- to posttraining (combined ERT +5% and TRT +7%; p = 0.001 for both). There was a decrease in systolic BP (SBP) (combined ERT -19% and TRT -21%; p = 0.001 for both) and diastolic BP (DBP) (-13% for both; p = 0.001 for both). There was an increase in bench press 1RM (combined ERT +54% and TRT +35%; p = 0.001 for both) and leg press 1RM (combined ERT +52% and TRT +33%; p = 0.001 for both). The magnitude of decrease in SBP after acute exercise was moderately correlated with the drop in SBP after chronic training for the ERT combined with AT group (r = 0.64). Both combined training protocols are effective in promoting benefits in health-related factors (HDL, SBP, DBP, and 1RM). Considering the lower cardiovascular stress experienced during combined ERT, this type of training seems to be the most suitable for elders, deconditioned individuals, and hypertensives.