【摘要】 目的 分析“周末勇士”运动模式与规律运动模式对大学生体脂肪含量及其分布的影响差异，为大学生的运动模式选择提供参考。方法 2023年4月选取北京体育大学本科生为研究对象，使用《国际身体活动问卷（短卷）》进行身体活动水平调查，在满足“周末勇士”判定标准的受试者中随机抽取21人，以年龄（±1岁）和性别作为匹配原则，招募规律运动1组和规律运动2组受试者各21人（男性11人，女性10人）。使用双能X线吸收法对3组受试者体脂肪含量及其分布进行定量测定。3组受试者体质量指数和体脂率的差异分析采用单因素方差分析，采用多元回归分析探究对体脂肪含量及其分布产生影响的主要因素。结果 3组受试者Android/Gynoid脂肪比（F=1.135,P=0.328）和全身（BF%=26.25%,F=2.355,P=0.104）、上肢（BF%=28.97%, F=1.328, P=0.273）、大腿（BF%=27.12%, F=1.461, P=0.240）、躯干（BF%=25.77%,F=2.983,P=0.058）体脂率之间差异均无统计学意义，“周末勇士”组受试者躯干体脂率高于规律运动2组，差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）。3组男性受试者Android/Gynoid脂肪比（F=1.296, P=0.288）和全身（BF%=22.13%, F=1.547, P=0.229）、上肢（BF%=22.18%, F=1.055, P=0.361）、大腿（BF%=21.01%, F=1.084, P=0.182）、躯干（BF%=23.11%, F=1.422, P=0.257）体脂率之间差异均无统计学意义；3组女性受试者全身（BF%=30.78%, F=3.952, P<0.05）、上肢（BF%=36.44%, F=3.790, P<0.05）和大腿（BF%=33.84%,F=6.316,P<0.01）体脂率之间差异有统计学意义。多元回归分析表明，身高（β=-0.543,P=0.013）和运动总时间（β=-0.332,P=0.018）与男性体脂率呈负相关；运动频率与女性体脂率呈负相关（β=-0.470,P<0.01）。结论 运动总时间是影响大学生人群体脂肪含量及其分布的决定性因素，在日常生活中或可通过“周末勇士”运动模式替代运动总时间相同或相近的规律运动模式，有效优化大学生体脂肪含量及分布。更多还原

【Abstract】 Objective This study aimed to analyze the differences in the effects of "weekend warrior" exercise patterns versus regular exercise patterns on body fat content and distribution among college students, providing references for exercise pattern selection. Methods Undergraduates from Beijing Sport University were selected as subjects in April, 2023. The International Physical Activity Questionnaire(Short Form) was used to investigate physical activity levels. Among participants meeting the "weekend warrior" criteria, 21 were randomly selected and matched by age(±1 year) and gender. Two groups of 21 participants each were recruited for regular exercise(group 1 and group 2; 11 males and 10 females). Body fat content and distribution were quantitatively measured using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. Differences in BMI and body fat percentage among the three groups were analyzed using one-way ANOVA, while multiple regression analysis was employed to investigate the primary factors influencing body fat content and its distribution. Results No statistically significant differences were found among the three groups in terms of Android/Gynoid fat ratio(F=1. 135, P=0. 328) and overall(BF% =26. 25%, F=2. 355, P=0. 104), upper limb(BF% =28. 97%, F=1. 328, P=0. 273), thigh(BF%=27. 12%, F=1. 461, P=0. 240), and trunk(BF%=25. 77%, F=2. 983, P=0. 058) body fat percentages. However, between-group comparisons revealed that the weekend warrior group exhibited significantly higher trunk body fat percentage than the regular exercise group 2(P<0. 05). Among the three groups of male participants, there were no statistically significant differences in overall(BF% =22. 13%, F=1. 547, P=0. 229), upper limb(BF%=22. 18%, F=1. 055, P=0. 361), thigh(BF%=21. 01%, F=1. 804, P=0. 182), trunk(BF% =23. 11%, F=1. 422, P=0. 257) body fat percentage, or Android/Gynoid fat ratio(F=1. 296, P=0. 288). In contrast, significant differences were observed in overall(BF% =30. 78%, F=3. 952, P<0. 05), upper limb(BF%=36. 44%, F=3. 790, P<0. 05), and thigh(BF%=33. 84%, F=6. 316, P<0. 01). Regression analysis indicated a negative correlation between total exercise time and male body fat percentage, as well as a negative correlation between exercise frequency and female body fat percentage. Conclusions Total exercise time is a decisive factor influencing body fat content and distribution among college students. Replacing the ’weekend warrior’ exercise pattern with a regular exercise pattern that maintains similar total exercise time may effectively optimize body fat content and distribution in this population.更多还原