作　　者： ;

机构地区： 深圳大学

出　　处： 《广州体育学院学报》 2015年第3期96-99,104共5页

摘　　要： 本研究目的主要探索采用跑步经济性测量相关指标基于乔治预测法评估最大摄氧量（（V）O2max）的可靠性.研究思路通过Bland-Altman方法来比较（V）O2max乔治预测法和实验室测试法的一致性.研究对象选择8名受过良好中长跑训练的运动系学生,受试者的基本情况：年龄（21.50±0.53）岁、身高（172.2±3.89）cm、体重（63.2±3.72）kg.第一天测试（V）O2max,隔日在跑台以次最大强度下测试跑步经济性相关指标（摄氧量、心率、体重等）.研究结果发现,通过乔治预测法估算获得8名受试者的（V）O2max值比实验测试值略高,但通过配对样本t检验发现,两组数据之间的差异不具有显著性（p =0.306（0.05）,8个差值均位于95％一致性界限以内.研究结论认为,（V）O2max乔治预测法和实验室测试法一致性较好,采用跑步经济性测量相关指标基于乔治预测法测量评估（V）O2max比较可靠,评估结果可以达到实验室测试法的效果. Based on Bland -Ahman method, this study was to compare the VO2max results by ＂George prediction method＂ and the laboratory measurement. We have selected eight weU - trained students who major in middle distance running as the research subjects. The basic situation of the subjects： age （21.50 ± 0.53） years, height （172.2 ± 3.89） cm, and the weight （63.2 ± 3.72） kg. We tested the VO2max at the first day, and then tested the running economy （RE） related heart rate at alternate days. The results showed that the VO2max value of ＂George prediction method＂is slightly higher than the value of laboratory measurement, but by the paired samples t- test, the difference between the two methods were not significant （p = 0.306 〉 0.05 ）. All 8 differences were located on the 95% consistency limits. So, the consistency between ＂George prediction method＂ and laboratory measurement was better. This study concluded that the differences between ＂George prediction method＂ and laboratory measurement were not significant. The consistency between the two methods was better.

关 键 词： 跑步经济性 最大摄氧量 乔治预测法 可靠性

分 类 号： [G804.7]

领　　域： []