緒論：加壓訓練是採用適當的加壓壓力結合相對低強度的運動訓練，即能達到較高 強度的訓練效果；本研究之目的爲比較8週不同強度阻力訓練及加壓處理對腿部肌肉量、 下肢等速肌力及跳躍表現之影響。方法：20名一般男大生隨機分爲低壓高阻力（LOHR, 0.7 SBP + 70% 1RM)及高壓低阻力（HOLR, 1.7 SBP + 40% 1RM)訓練，進行每週3次， 每次5組，每組12次反覆，並於8週訓練前、後進行各項生理評估。所得數據以混合設 計二因子變異數分析，比較兩組各項指標之組内及組間差異。結果：LOHR訓練後雙腿 肌肉量皆顯著增加（訓練前加壓腿及無加壓腿分別爲：8.4 ± 0.89、8.5 ± 0.86 ;訓練後則 分別爲：8.7 ± 0.88、8.7 ± 0.90 kg)，而HOLR訓練則未有顯著進步之情形；兩組組間皆 無顯著差異。肌酸激酶只有LOHR組在第4週顯著高於後測。兩組大腿推證1RM皆有顯 著進步外（訓練前LOHR及HOLR分別爲：256.7 ± 76.97、267.3 ± 72.26;訓練後爲：352.2 ± 107.53、340.5 ± 87.59 kg); LOHR 組的等速肌力在 60。• s-1 及 180。• s-1 膝屈加壓腿、180。• s-1膝伸無加壓腿之力矩峰値顯著優於前測；而HOLR組兩腿在60° . s-1與180° . s-1的膝 伸及膝屈皆顯著優於前測。兩組的原地擺臂垂直跳與跨步擺臂垂直跳表現皆顯著優於前 測，且組間無差異（訓練前LOHR及HOLR的原地擺臂垂直跳跳躍高度分別爲：40.6 土 3.13、36.4 ± 5.96 ;訓練後爲：44.2 ± 4.73、40.6 ± 6.22 cm;訓練前騰空時間：574.9 ± 22.43、 543.0 ± 44.77 ;训練後爲：599.4 ± 33.11、573.0 ± 45.58 ms ;訓練前跨步擺臂垂直跳跳躍 高度：41.1± 4.12、36.7 ±7.60 ;訓練後：46.2 ±5_79、42.5 ±7.56 cm ;訓練前騰空時間： 575.2 ± 30.63、544.5 ± 58.14 ;訓練後：609.3 ± 41.47、586.5 ± 55.69 ms)。結論：低壓高 阻訓練的腿部肌肉量顯著增加，且等速肌力於加壓腿較佳，而高壓低阻訓練的肌力表現 則兩腿皆顯著進步，此外，本研究之訓練可增進跳躍表現；不過本研究發現，各變項之 進步主要受到阻力運動的影響較大，而加壓效果則較爲有限。

Introduction: The occlusion training is to use the appropriate pressure combined with relatively low intensity exercise training, it could achieve a similar effect as the high intensity training. The purpose of this study was to compare the 8 weeks of different occlusion pressures and intensities of resistance training on leg’s muscle mass， lower limb isokinetic muscular strength and jump performance. Methods: 20 untrained students were randomly divided into low occlusion combined with high intensity resistance training [LOHR, 0.7 systolic blood pressure (SBP) + 70% 1RM] and high occlusion combined with low intensity resistance training (HOLR ; 1.7 SBP + 40% 1RM). The training was 3 days per week，5 sets a day，12 repetitions per set. And perform the physiological assessment before and after the training. Data were analyzed by using mixed design of two-way ANOVA to test the difference within and between groups. Results: The leg muscle mass in LOHR training was significantly increased after training (occlusion and non-occlusion before training: 8.4 士 0.89, 8.5 土 0.86 ; after training: 8.7 士 0.88, 8.7 士 0.90 kg，respectively), and the LOHR was not increase significantly ; there were no significant difference between the two groups. The muscle damage indicator CK was only significantly higher in the 4th week than post-test in HOLR group. The 1RM of leg press was significantly improved in both groups. ( LOHR and HOLR before training: 256.7 土 76.97, 267.3 ± 72.26 ; after training: 352.2 土 107.53, 340.5 ± 87.59 kg，respectively) Furthermore，the peak torque of isokinetic muscle strength of 60° • S"1 knee flexion with occlusion, 180° • S"1 knee flexion with occlusion and 180° • S"1 knee extension without occlusion were significantly better than pre-test in LOHR group, whereas the isokinetic of 60° • S"1 and 180° • S"1 knee extension and flexion were significantly higher than pre-test in HOLR group. The jumping performance on the two groups, the CMJ and SJ jump height and flight time performance were superior to the pre-test in two groups, and there was no significant differences between the two groups, (jump height of CMJ before training: 40.6 ± 3.13, 36.4 ± 5.96; after training: 44.2 ± 4.73, 40.6 ± 6.22 cm; flight time of CMJ before training: 574.9 士 22.43, 543.0 士 44.77; after training: 599.4 士 33.11，573.0 士 45.58 ms; jump height of SJ before training: 41.1 士 4.12, 36.7 士 7.60; after training: 46.2 士 5.79, 42.5 士 7.56 cm; flight time of SJ before training: 575.2 士 30.63, 544.5 士 58.14; after training: 609.3 士 41.47, 586.5 士 55.69 ms, LOHR and HOLR respectively) Conclusion: LOHR5s leg muscle mass was increased significant and the isokinetic muscle strength was better in the occlusion limb. The HOLR group with positive effect on both legs3 muscular strength. In addition, the training program were able to improve jumping performance effectively. The training benefit may due to the resistance training, and the training effects of occlusion was restricted.