The amplitude of the P300 wave, following exercise intensity at 75% of the maximum pulse (Pmax) (Fz 15.00+/-4.57, Cz 18.63+/-8.83 mV ) was statistically higher (p<0.05) than the amplitude of the P300 at rest (Fz 11.21+/-4.15 mV; (Cz 13.40+/-8.04 mV), at 60% (Fz 11.86+/-5.11 mV; Cz 14.54+/-8.06 mV) and at 90% of maximum pulse (Fz 13.26+/-4.73 mV; Cz 14.91+/-8.91 mV). There were no statistically significant differences (p>0.05) between amplitudes at 60% of Pmax and values obtained at rest and at 90% of Pmax. Also, no statistically significant differences were recorded (p>0.05) among the latencies of P300 recorded at rest (Fz 323.57+/-3.24 ms; Cz 323.57+/-13.24 ms) and at 60% of Pmax (Fz 321.14+/-22.38 ms; Cz 321.86+/-22.88 ms), at 75% of Pmax (Fz 321.50+/-16.67 ms; Cz 322.50+/-14.60 ms) and at 90% of Pmax (Fz 326.29+/-7.85 ms; Cz 325.43+/-7.63 ms). DISCUSSSION AND CONCLUSION: Physical activity has a positive impact on cognitive functions. At intermediate intensities, the amplitude of P300 increases, but at submaximal intensities it decreases to values obtained at rest. However, the latency of P300 did not show a statistically significant change after different intensities of exercise.
Procena telesne kompozicije zauzima važno mesto u proceni zdravstvenih rizika u brojnim medicinskim granama, kao i u oblasti fiziologije sporta kao važna komponenta fiziološkog profila sportiste. Postoje brojni pristupi proceni telesne kompozicije, koji se mogu grubo podeliti na direktne i indirektne. Danas se u kliničkoj praksi koriste indirektni modeli, koji na relativno jednostavan i brz način mogu dati podatke o udelu pojedinih komponenti telesnog sastava. Najjednostavnija, i za širu populaciju najdostupnija metoda je antropometrijska, dok se kao metodom rastuće pouzdanosti označava metoda bioelektrične impedance. Hidrodenzitometrija, iako pouzdana, nije metod izbora u većim studijama zbog nekomformnosti samog postupka i zahtevnijih uslova po pitanju opreme. DXA metoda zbog svoje velike pouzdanosti ima potencijal primene kao zlatnog standarda za procenu komponenata telesnog sastava, a uključuje relativno malu dozu zračenja. CT i NMR su najsofisticiranije metode kojima se egzaktno može proceniti masna masa različitih regiona tela, visceralna masna masa kao i mišićna masa tela. Međutim zbog male dostupnosti i visoke cene nemaju primenu u široj populaciji, ali su veoma važne u raličitim kliničkih studijama. Možda najbolji pristup procene telesne kompozicije je kombinacijom više jednostavnih i dostupnih metoda čime se može povećati pouzdanost dobijenih podataka i adekvatnije proceniti zdravstveni rizici vezani za specifični telesni sastav.Ključne reči: telesna kompozicija, sportisti, antropometrija, indeks telesne mase. UVODTelesna struktura čoveka kao jedinstvo konstitutivnih elemenata ljudskog tela ima veliki značaj u različitim medicinskim disciplinama, kada se prate faktori rizika za nastanak i razvoj bolesti, ali i za razumevanje procesa rasta i razvoja ljudskog organizma [1]. Posebno mesto zauzima analiza telesne kompozicije u sportskim naukama jer je ona jedan od elemenata koji čine fiziološki profil spotiste, i ima značajnu ulogu u postizanju vrhunskih rezultata. Istorijski gledano, interes za telesnu kompoziciju narastao je sa potrebom da se proceni masna masa tela. U tom kontekstu, najviše pažnje u ovoj oblasti usmereno je na kvantitativnu procenu masne i mišićne mase tela.Martin i Drinkwater [2] su 1991 godine predložili tri pristupa proceni telesne kompozicije. Metodom prvog nivoa mere se direktno komponente telesne strukture, a baziran je na podacima dobijenim disekcijom kadavera gde se ukupna masna masa tela određuje ekstrakcijom svih lipida iz tela. Prvi podaci o telesnom sastavu dobijenom na ovaj način potiču iz rada nemačkih anatoma koji su objavili prve podatke o direktnoj analizi telesne kompozicije [3]. Do osamdesetih godina prošlog veka izvedeno je samo nekoliko studija sa relativno malim brojem kompletnih disekcija kadavera [4,5].Sve druge metode procene telesne kompozicije su zapravo indirektne metode, i mogu biti indirektne metode drugog ili trećeg nivoa (dvostruko indirektne). Procene stukture na drugom ili trećem nivou bazirane su na pretpostavkama i izvedenim jednačinama. Drugi nivo po...
Introduction. Timely detection of insulin resistance is of great importance and a number of indices have been developed for its evaluation, among which the homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance index is the most commonly used in clinical practice. However, it can be calculated via two different models - homeostasis model assessment 1 and homeostasis model assessment 2. Most studies determine the cut-off values of the study population using the homeostasis model assessment 1, while recently most physicians use homeostasis model assessment 2 in everyday clinical practice. The aim of our study was to examine whether there was a difference in the values of homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance and homeostasis model assessment of panceratic beta cells function calculated using these two models. Material and Methods. Laboratory findings of 42 patients who were diagnosed with glycemia and insulinemia were used in this study. Fasting and postprandial glycemia and insulinemia were used to calculate homeostasis model assessment indices using homeostasis model assessment 1 and homeostasis model assessment 2. Results. When comparing the values of the homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance and homeostasis model assessment B indices, calculated via homeostasis model assessment 1 and homeostasis model assessment 2, we found a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001) which was also obtained when comparing the values of the homeostasis model assessment B index. Linear correlation analysis showed a significant positive correlation between the measured values of the homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (calculated via both models) and postprandial insulinemia at 120 minutes (p < 0.005). Conclusion. The results indicate that homeostasis model assessment 2 yields significantly lower homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance and homeostasis model assessment B index values than when calculated by the homeostasis model assessment, which may be a stumbling block in the use of homeostasis model assessment index. It is necessary to pay attention which homeostasis model assessment model was used to define the cut-off values of these indices, and to use the same model in the diagnosis of insulin resistance in each patient in everyday clinical practice.
The difference between standard and modified versions can be explained by the difference between test and retest probes, and also because of modification of protocol which can partially influence the results of testing.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.