Strength training versus aerobic interval training to modify risk factors of metabolic syndrome
Strength training versus aerobic interval training to modify risk factors of metabolic syndrome
复制标题
DOI：
10.1152/japplphysiol.00996.2009
复制
发表时间：
2010-04-01
影响因子：
3.3
通讯作者：
Slordahl, Stig Arild
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Stensvold, Dorth;Tjonna, Arnt Erik;Slordahl, Stig Arild
Stensvold D, thjonna AE, Skaug EA, asppenes S, Stolen T, Wisloff U, Slordahl SA。力量训练与有氧间歇训练对代谢综合征危险因素的影响。中国生物医学工程学报（英文版），2009,31(4):444 - 444。首次发表于2010年1月21日；doi: 10.1152 / japplphysiol.00996.2009。代谢综合征的特征是中枢性肥胖、血压升高、空腹血糖和甘油三酯水平高、高密度脂蛋白水平低。有规律的身体活动可以改善代谢状况，降低患心血管疾病和过早死亡的风险。然而，治疗代谢综合征及其相关心血管异常的最佳训练方案仍不明确。43名代谢综合征患者被随机分为以下组：有氧间歇训练（AIT, n = 11）、力量训练（ST, n = 11）、AIT和ST （COM, n = 10）联合训练（3次/周，持续12周）或对照组（n = 11）。在干预前后评估代谢综合征的危险因素。腰围（cm）在AIT[95%可信区间（CI）： -2.5至-0.04]、COM （95% CI: -2.11至-0.63）和ST （95% CI: -2.68至-0.84）后显著减小，而对照组腰围增加（95% CI: 0.37-2.9）。AIT组和COM组的峰值氧摄取分别增加了11%和10%。经ST和COM处理后，最大强度分别提高45%和31%。内皮功能，以血流介导的扩张（%）测量，在AIT （95% CI: 0.3-3）、COM （95% CI: 0.3-3）和ST （95% CI: 1.5-4.5）后得到改善。两组内或两组之间的体重、空腹血糖或高密度脂蛋白水平均无变化。总之，这三种训练方案对代谢综合征相关的生理异常都有有益的影响。
Stensvold D, Tjonna AE, Skaug EA, Aspenes S, Stolen T, Wisloff U, Slordahl SA. Strength training versus aerobic interval training to modify risk factors of metabolic syndrome. J Appl Physiol 108: 804-810, 2010. First published January 21, 2010; doi:10.1152/japplphysiol.00996.2009.-Metabolic syndrome is characterized by central obesity, elevated blood pressure, high fasting glucose and triglyceride levels, and low HDL levels. Regular physical activity can improve the metabolic profile and reduce the risks of cardiovascular diseases and premature mortality. However, the optimal training regime to treat metabolic syndrome and its associated cardiovascular abnormalities remains undefined. Forty-three participants with metabolic syndrome were randomized to one of the following groups: aerobic interval training (AIT; n = 11), strength training (ST; n = 11), a combination of AIT and ST (COM; n = 10) 3 times/wk for 12 wk, or control (n = 11). Risk factors comprising metabolic syndrome were evaluated before and after the intervention. Waist circumference (in cm) was significantly reduced after AIT [95% confidence interval (CI): -2.5 to -0.04], COM (95% CI: -2.11 to -0.63), and ST (95% CI: -2.68 to -0.84), whereas the control group had an increase in waist circumference (95% CI: 0.37-2.9). The AIT and COM groups had 11% and 10% increases in peak O2 uptake, respectively. There were 45% and 31% increases in maximal strength after ST and COM, respectively. Endothelial function, measured as flow-mediated dilatation (in %), was improved after AIT (95% CI: 0.3-3), COM (95% CI: 0.3-3), and ST (95% CI: 1.5-4.5). There were no changes in body weight, fasting plasma glucose, or HDL levels within or between the groups. In conclusion, all three training regimes have beneficial effects on physiological abnormalities associated with metabolic syndrome.