Why the study?
Does endurance training alter the cardiovascular response to upper and lower body static contraction in males?
Does endurance training alter the cardiovascular response to upper and lower body static contraction in males?
Cardiovascular regulation during static contraction is similar in endurance-trained and untrained individuals, indicating that endurance training does not significantly alter these acute hemodynamic responses.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Similar hemodynamic responses to static contraction regardless of training status should not yet change practice; leaves open effects in dynamic exercise or other populations.
The purpose of this study was to investigate the cardiovascular response to upper and lower body static contraction in endurance-trained (ET) and untrained (UT) males (both groups N = 6). The groups were similar in age, height, and weight. However, the ET group exhibited a markedly higher (P less than 0.01) VO2 max during treadmill running than the UT group (65.4 +/- 4.8 vs 49.9 +/- 2.8 ml X kg-1 X min-1, mean +/- SD). Both groups performed static handgrip and leg extension in a randomly assigned order at 30% of maximal voluntary contraction for 3 min. Heart rate and mean intra-arterial blood pressure (MABP) were measured at rest and throughout contraction. At rest, differences between the two groups were not significant for heart rate (54 +/- 10 vs 66 +/- 8 beats X min-1) or MABP (93 +/- 4 vs 91 +/- 5 mm Hg). During handgrip, the increases in heart rate (24 +/- 12 vs 15 +/- 6) and MABP (24 +/- 10 vs 27 +/- 12) were not significantly different between the two groups. During leg extension, the magnitude of the increases in heart rate (44 +/- 21 vs 46 +/- 27) and MABP (37 +/- 11 vs 41 +/- 10) were again not different for the two groups. These results suggest that cardiovascular regulation during static contraction is similar in endurance-trained and untrained individuals, even during contraction involving the trained musculature.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Seals et al. (1983) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: