Physiological and biomechanical responses to three different landing surfaces during step aerobics
Using a padded landing surface during step aerobics has the potential to both reduce impact forces and increase energy cost. Eleven college-aged females performed 8-min trials [2-min of each step: basic step, alternate lead (AL), knee raise (KR), and step kick (SK)] on three surfaces. Surface condit...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of exercise physiology online 2003-05, Vol.6 (2), p.70-79 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 79 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 2 |
| container_start_page | 70 |
| container_title | Journal of exercise physiology online |
| container_volume | 6 |
| creator | Skelly, WA Darby, LA Phillips, K |
| description | Using a padded landing surface during step aerobics has the potential to both reduce impact forces and increase energy cost. Eleven college-aged females performed 8-min trials [2-min of each step: basic step, alternate lead (AL), knee raise (KR), and step kick (SK)] on three surfaces. Surface conditions were uncovered force platform (FP) and FP covered with each of two different pads of medium-density foam [0.025 m (Thick) & 0.010 m (Thin)]. Data for oxygen consumption (VO sub(2)), heart rate (HR), ratings of perceived exertion (RPE), maximum vertical ground reaction force (VGRF), rear-foot motion, and time of foot contact (TFC) were collected and a landing surface questionnaire was administered to obtain subjective perceptions of surfaces. Two-way repeated measures ANOVAs (STEP [3] x SURFACE [3]) were calculated. There were no significant differences for any variables among the surfaces. Significant differences were detected for VO sub(2) (AL |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_18875351</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>18875351</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-proquest_miscellaneous_188753513</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNjD0PgjAURRujifjxHzq5kRSRFGajcXRwJ6W8Qk1psa8d_PcS4uDodO89ObkLkmSs4mnFi2z509dkg_hk7MhOJU9Ic-_fqJ1xnZbCUGFb2mg3gOyFnYkHHJ1FQBocDb0HoK1WCjzYQM3ka9tRjF4JOTlt9PMOMFIB3jVa4o6slDAI-29uyeF6eZxv6ejdKwKGetAowUxn4CLWWVnyIi-y_G_xAz2mS1s</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>18875351</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Physiological and biomechanical responses to three different landing surfaces during step aerobics</title><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><creator>Skelly, WA ; Darby, LA ; Phillips, K</creator><creatorcontrib>Skelly, WA ; Darby, LA ; Phillips, K</creatorcontrib><description>Using a padded landing surface during step aerobics has the potential to both reduce impact forces and increase energy cost. Eleven college-aged females performed 8-min trials [2-min of each step: basic step, alternate lead (AL), knee raise (KR), and step kick (SK)] on three surfaces. Surface conditions were uncovered force platform (FP) and FP covered with each of two different pads of medium-density foam [0.025 m (Thick) & 0.010 m (Thin)]. Data for oxygen consumption (VO sub(2)), heart rate (HR), ratings of perceived exertion (RPE), maximum vertical ground reaction force (VGRF), rear-foot motion, and time of foot contact (TFC) were collected and a landing surface questionnaire was administered to obtain subjective perceptions of surfaces. Two-way repeated measures ANOVAs (STEP [3] x SURFACE [3]) were calculated. There were no significant differences for any variables among the surfaces. Significant differences were detected for VO sub(2) (AL<KR,SK), HR (AL<KR<SK), ROM (AL>SK), and TFC (AL>KR,SK) among the step movements. Subjects preferred stepping on the thick pad, felt less safe on the thin pad, and perceived more lower extremity stress landing on the uncovered force platform. The addition of two different density padded surfaces to the surfaces of two force platforms did not elicit differences in physiological or biomechanical force variables during 8 min of different actions used in step aerobics.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1097-9751</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1097-9751</identifier><language>eng</language><ispartof>Journal of exercise physiology online, 2003-05, Vol.6 (2), p.70-79</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Skelly, WA</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Darby, LA</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Phillips, K</creatorcontrib><title>Physiological and biomechanical responses to three different landing surfaces during step aerobics</title><title>Journal of exercise physiology online</title><description>Using a padded landing surface during step aerobics has the potential to both reduce impact forces and increase energy cost. Eleven college-aged females performed 8-min trials [2-min of each step: basic step, alternate lead (AL), knee raise (KR), and step kick (SK)] on three surfaces. Surface conditions were uncovered force platform (FP) and FP covered with each of two different pads of medium-density foam [0.025 m (Thick) & 0.010 m (Thin)]. Data for oxygen consumption (VO sub(2)), heart rate (HR), ratings of perceived exertion (RPE), maximum vertical ground reaction force (VGRF), rear-foot motion, and time of foot contact (TFC) were collected and a landing surface questionnaire was administered to obtain subjective perceptions of surfaces. Two-way repeated measures ANOVAs (STEP [3] x SURFACE [3]) were calculated. There were no significant differences for any variables among the surfaces. Significant differences were detected for VO sub(2) (AL<KR,SK), HR (AL<KR<SK), ROM (AL>SK), and TFC (AL>KR,SK) among the step movements. Subjects preferred stepping on the thick pad, felt less safe on the thin pad, and perceived more lower extremity stress landing on the uncovered force platform. The addition of two different density padded surfaces to the surfaces of two force platforms did not elicit differences in physiological or biomechanical force variables during 8 min of different actions used in step aerobics.</description><issn>1097-9751</issn><issn>1097-9751</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2003</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNjD0PgjAURRujifjxHzq5kRSRFGajcXRwJ6W8Qk1psa8d_PcS4uDodO89ObkLkmSs4mnFi2z509dkg_hk7MhOJU9Ic-_fqJ1xnZbCUGFb2mg3gOyFnYkHHJ1FQBocDb0HoK1WCjzYQM3ka9tRjF4JOTlt9PMOMFIB3jVa4o6slDAI-29uyeF6eZxv6ejdKwKGetAowUxn4CLWWVnyIi-y_G_xAz2mS1s</recordid><startdate>20030501</startdate><enddate>20030501</enddate><creator>Skelly, WA</creator><creator>Darby, LA</creator><creator>Phillips, K</creator><scope>7TS</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20030501</creationdate><title>Physiological and biomechanical responses to three different landing surfaces during step aerobics</title><author>Skelly, WA ; Darby, LA ; Phillips, K</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-proquest_miscellaneous_188753513</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2003</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Skelly, WA</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Darby, LA</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Phillips, K</creatorcontrib><collection>Physical Education Index</collection><jtitle>Journal of exercise physiology online</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Skelly, WA</au><au>Darby, LA</au><au>Phillips, K</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Physiological and biomechanical responses to three different landing surfaces during step aerobics</atitle><jtitle>Journal of exercise physiology online</jtitle><date>2003-05-01</date><risdate>2003</risdate><volume>6</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>70</spage><epage>79</epage><pages>70-79</pages><issn>1097-9751</issn><eissn>1097-9751</eissn><abstract>Using a padded landing surface during step aerobics has the potential to both reduce impact forces and increase energy cost. Eleven college-aged females performed 8-min trials [2-min of each step: basic step, alternate lead (AL), knee raise (KR), and step kick (SK)] on three surfaces. Surface conditions were uncovered force platform (FP) and FP covered with each of two different pads of medium-density foam [0.025 m (Thick) & 0.010 m (Thin)]. Data for oxygen consumption (VO sub(2)), heart rate (HR), ratings of perceived exertion (RPE), maximum vertical ground reaction force (VGRF), rear-foot motion, and time of foot contact (TFC) were collected and a landing surface questionnaire was administered to obtain subjective perceptions of surfaces. Two-way repeated measures ANOVAs (STEP [3] x SURFACE [3]) were calculated. There were no significant differences for any variables among the surfaces. Significant differences were detected for VO sub(2) (AL<KR,SK), HR (AL<KR<SK), ROM (AL>SK), and TFC (AL>KR,SK) among the step movements. Subjects preferred stepping on the thick pad, felt less safe on the thin pad, and perceived more lower extremity stress landing on the uncovered force platform. The addition of two different density padded surfaces to the surfaces of two force platforms did not elicit differences in physiological or biomechanical force variables during 8 min of different actions used in step aerobics.</abstract></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1097-9751 |
| ispartof | Journal of exercise physiology online, 2003-05, Vol.6 (2), p.70-79 |
| issn | 1097-9751 1097-9751 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_18875351 |
| source | Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals |
| title | Physiological and biomechanical responses to three different landing surfaces during step aerobics |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-09T17%3A36%3A44IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Physiological%20and%20biomechanical%20responses%20to%20three%20different%20landing%20surfaces%20during%20step%20aerobics&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20exercise%20physiology%20online&rft.au=Skelly,%20WA&rft.date=2003-05-01&rft.volume=6&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=70&rft.epage=79&rft.pages=70-79&rft.issn=1097-9751&rft.eissn=1097-9751&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cproquest%3E18875351%3C/proquest%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=18875351&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |