...
首页> 外文期刊>International Journal of Exercise Science >Energy Cost of Active and Sedentary Music Video Games: Handheld Gaming vs. Walking and Sitting
【24h】

Energy Cost of Active and Sedentary Music Video Games: Handheld Gaming vs. Walking and Sitting

机译:主动和久坐音乐视频游戏的能源成本:手持游戏与步行和坐下

获取原文
           

摘要

International Journal of Exercise Science 10(7): 1038-1050, 2017. To compare energy expenditure during and after active and handheld video game drumming compared to walking and sitting. Ten experienced, college-aged men performed four protocols (one per week): no-exercise seated control (CTRL), virtual drumming on a handheld gaming device (HANDHELD), active drumming on drum pads (DRUM), and walking on a treadmill at ~30% of VO2max (WALK). Protocols were performed after an overnight fast, and expired air was collected continuously during (30min) and after (30min) exercise. DRUM and HANDHELD song lists, day of the week, and time of day were identical for each participant. Significant differences (p DRUM > HANDHELD. No significant differences in the rates of energy expenditure among groups during recovery were observed. Total energy expenditure was significantly greater (p < 0.05) during WALK (149.5 ± 30.6 kcal) compared to DRUM (118.7 ± 18.8 kcal) and HANDHELD (44.9±11.6 kcal), and greater during DRUM compared to HANDHELD. Total energy expenditure was not significantly different between HANDHELD (44.9 ± 11.6 kcal) and CTRL (38.2 ± 6.0 kcal). Active video game drumming at expert-level significantly increased energy expenditure compared to handheld, but it hardly met moderate-intensity activity standards, and energy expenditure was greatest during walking. Energy expenditure with handheld video game drumming was not different from no-exercise control. Thus, traditional aerobic exercise remains at the forefront for achieving the minimum amount and intensity of physical activity for health, individuals desiring to use video games for achieving weekly physical activity recommendations should choose games that require significant involvement of lower-body musculature, and time spent playing sedentary games should be a limited part of an active lifestyle.
机译:International Journal of Exercise Science 10(7):1038-1050,2017。与步行和坐着相比,比较主动和手持式视频游戏击鼓过程中和之后的能量消耗。十名经验丰富的大专生执行了四个协议(每周一次):无运动坐姿控制(CTRL),手持游戏机上的虚拟鼓(HANDHELD),鼓垫上的主动鼓(DRUM)以及跑步机上行走约最大VO2max(WALK)的30%。禁食过夜后进行操作,在运动(30分钟)和运动后(30分钟)连续收集呼出的空气。每个参与者的鼓和手持歌曲列表,星期几和时间是相同的。显着差异(p DRUM>手动。恢复期间各组之间的能量消耗率没有显着差异。与DRUM(118.7±18.8)相比,WALK(149.5±30.6 kcal)期间的总能量消耗显着更大(p <0.05) khand)和HANDHELD(44.9±11.6 kcal),并且在DRUM期间比HANDHELD大。HANDHELD(44.9±11.6 kcal)和CTRL(38.2±6.0 kcal)之间的总能量消耗没有显着差异。与手持设备相比,健身水平显着增加了能量消耗,但几乎没有达到中等强度的运动标准,步行时能量消耗最大;手持视频游戏击鼓时的能量消耗与无运动控制没有区别,因此,传统的有氧运动仍然存在为了实现最低限度的运动量和强度以达到健康目的的最前沿,希望使用视频游戏实现每周运动的个人所有的运动建议都应选择需要下半身肌肉大量参与的游戏,而久坐游戏所花费的时间应是积极生活方式的一部分。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号