背景：增強式訓練是現行普遍，且有效的爆發力訓練方式之一，全身振動訓練與複合式訓練（阻力訓練+增強式訓練）是現今常見較新頴的訓練方式，過去研究顯示全身振動訓練對下肢爆發力的表現有立即性的助益，就長期助益來說則意見分歧；過去研究顯示複合式訓練對下肢爆發力的表現是有長期性的助益，卻無立即性的效益，本研究基於複合式訓練的組合概念，將利用增強式訓練及全身振動訓練的特性，兩者結合成為新式複合式訓練（全身振動訓練+增強式訓練），分析此新式複合式訓練對下肢爆發力表現的立即性和長期性影響。目的：【第一年】分析新式複合訓練、傳統式複合訓練、單獨增強式訓練、單獨阻力訓練、單獨振動訓練後對下肢爆發力各項運動學、動力學和肌電圖參數之立即性差異。【第二年】分析8週新式複合訓練、傳統式複合訓練、單獨增強式訓練、單獨阻力訓練、單獨振動訓練後對下肢爆發力各項運動學、動力學和肌電圖參數之長期性差異。方法：【第一年】招募25位男子甲組籃排球員為受試者，所有受試者皆接受5種不同的訓練方式，接受每一種不同的訓練方式均間隔24小時以上。訓練前、後立即檢測3次的下蹲跳，以分析不同訓練方式對下肢爆發力表現的立即性影響。以高速攝影機、測力板和肌電圖系統同步擷取下蹲跳資料，並計算出運動學、動力學和肌電圖參數進行分析比較。以重複量數5×2two-way ANOVA考驗受試者在不同訓練間與前後測對下蹲跳各項參數的差異。【第二年】招募60名男子甲組運動員為受試者，包含籃球隊、排球隊、田徑隊、足球隊、跆拳道隊等需下肢爆發力訓練之運動員，將受試者依能力用分層隨機分組法分為6組，其中1組為控制組，進行8週的訓練。訓練前、後檢測3次的下蹲跳，以分析不同訓練方式對下肢爆發力表現的立即長期性影響。以混合設計獨立樣本 6×2two-way ANOVA考驗受試者在不同訓練組間與前後測對下蹲跳各項參數的差異。統計顯著水準皆定為α=.05，當達到顯著水準時，利用Bonferroni法進行事後比較。
Background: Plyometric training is one of the most popular and efficient training methods for muscle power. The whole-body vibration and complex training (resistance training combined with plyometric training) are relatively new training methods. Many researchers indicated that complex training may not have the acute effect on power whereas the whole-body vibration training has. However, the complex training may have long-term effect. Based on the concept of complex training, we use plyometric training combined with whole-body vibration training as a new complex training. In the present study, we will test its acute as well as long-term effect on power. Purposes: To quantify and compare the acute effect (First year) and long-term effect (Second year) on lower-extremity power between new complex training, traditional complex training, plyometric training, resistance training, and vibration training via analysis of kinematic, kinetic and associated electromyographic variables. Methods: First year- Twenty-five college volley ball and basketball players serve as subjects. Each subject receives 5 training on 5 different days with at least of 24-hr between-training interval. Three countermovement jumps (CMJ) are tested before and after each of the 5 trainings. Motion analysis system and two force plates, and EMG are utilized for data collection. 5×2 two-way repeated ANOVA is used to test the between-training differences. Second year- Sixty division I athletes serve as subjects. They are assigned to each of 5 different training groups or the control group using block randomized method according to subjects’jump ability. The training period is 8-wk. The differences between groups and trainings on CMJ biomechanical variables are compared using 6×2 two-way mixed ANOVA. The significance level is set as α=.05. Pos-hoc test is performed with Bonferroni adjustment while appropriate.
