| 승마 보법별 신체활동 측정도구에 따른 에너지소비량 비교 |
| 박준근1, 신승윤2, 안한주1, 장창현3 |
1용인대학교 체육학과
2용인대학교 동양무예학과
3선문대학교 스포츠과학과 |
| Comparison of Energy Expenditure for Walking Steps of Horse and Physical Activity Assessment Instruments in Horse Riding Exercise |
| Jun-Ggeun Park1, Seung-Yun Shin2, Han-Ju Ahn1, Chang-Hyun Jang3 |
|
| Correspondence |
Chang-Hyun Jang , Tel: +82-41-530-2292, Fax: +82-41-530-2810, Email: jang@sunmoon.ac.kr
|
|
|
Received: June 3, 2015; Accepted: September 23, 2015. Published online: November 30, 2015. |
|
|
|
| ABSTRACT |
PURPOSE:
The aim of this study was to compare the energy expenditure for 3 walking steps of horse and 3 physical activity assessment instruments (Armband, GT1M and GT3X) in horse riding exercise.
METHODS:
For this purpose, 9 men participants in their 20s who had over 3 years horse riding experiences at S horse-riding tract in Gyeonggi-do and had a qualification of leisure sport instructors (horse riding) were selected for the study. The measurement was taken place at the indoor horse riding track with 25 m wide and 37 m long. For a criterion test, the energy expenditure measurement method by the respiratory gas analysis was employed. The horse riding exercise type during the measurement consists of walk, trot and canter, 6 minutes walk, 6 minutes rest on horse, 6 minutes trot, 6 minutes rest on horse and 6 minute canter were taken place.
RESULTS:
Compared with the rest of footwork specific energy consumption of horse riding, walk viewing approximately 1.6 times, trot is about 3.2 times, 4.4 times higher canter appeared, showed significant differences in all the footwork (F=39.492, p<.001). Compared with the results of K4b2 the criterion test instrument in the difference between the energy expenditure assessment instruments, in the case of walk Armband 1.6 times, GT1M 1.6 times, GT3X about 2.2 times both showed a overestimated (F=48.536, p<.001), about 2.1 times Armband case of trot, GT1M about 2.4 times, GT3X approximately 2.4 times (F=255.637, p<.001), about 1.2 times Armband case of a canter, GT1M about 2.7 times, GT3X 2.8 times were overestimated (F=417.841, p<.001).
CONCLUSIONS:
This study demonstrated that other energy expenditure assessment instruments (Armband, GT1M and GT3X) were overestimated in overall compared with the criterion test instrument. Following-study on seeking the energy consumption measurement method, excluding the influence of the horse and the wearing position of the measurement tool that can improve the accuracy is determined to be necessary. |
| Key words:
horse riding, walking steps of horse, energy expenditure assessment instruments, energy expenditure |
|
|
|
PDF Links
Full text via DOI
Download Citation 
