The aim of the study was to compare the cardiovascular autonomic response (CAR) of recreational weight trainers, long distance runners and non-exercised subjects. Men, 21 to 55 years old, were grouped in: recreational weight trainers (W, n = 31), long distance runners (R, n = 28) and non-exercised (C, n = 35). Four strategies of evaluation of the CAR were selected: Resting heart rate (RHR), cold pressor test (CPT), heart rate variability (HRV) and heart rate recovery (HHR) following maximal exercise test. The RHR was lower (R = 54 ± 2; W = 62 ± 2; C= 65 ± 2 bpm; mean ± SE) and the HHR 60s post exercise was larger in the R group (R = 34 ± 3; W = 23 ± 1; C = 24 ± 2 bpm). The R group presented larger high-frequency (HF; 55.1 ± 4.0 n.u) and smaller low-frequency (LF; 43.1 ± 4.0 n.u) components of HRV than C group (HF = 40.7 ± 3.3; LF = 56.7 ± 3.5 n.u.). The W group did not show any differences compared to C group. The study's conclusion was that long-term weight-training program, unlike of long-term running training, it is not able to alter significantly the regulatory pattern of CAR.
展开▼
机译：这项研究的目的是比较休闲健身教练，长跑运动员和非运动受试者的心血管自主神经反应（CAR）。年龄在21至55岁之间的男性分为以下几类：休闲负重教练（W，n = 31），长跑运动员（R，n = 28）和未锻炼（C，n = 35）。选择四种评估CAR的策略：最大运动测试后的静息心率（RHR），冷压力测试（CPT），心率变异性（HRV）和心率恢复（HHR）。 R组运动后RHR较低（R = 54±2; W = 62±2; C = 65±2 bpm;平均值±SE），运动后HHR 60s较大（R = 34±3; W = 23 ±1; C = 24±2 bpm）。与C组（HF = 40.7±3.3; LF = 56.7±3.5 n.u.）相比，R组表现出的HRV高频分量更大（HF; 55.1±4.0 n.u）而低频（LF; 43.1±4.0 n.u）分量更小。与C组相比，W组没有任何差异。该研究的结论是，长期的体重训练计划与长期的跑步训练不同，它不能显着改变CAR的调节模式。
展开▼
