本研究目的在探討四種動態恢復強度對游泳選手訓練後血乳酸清除及心跳變異度之影響。方法是以高雄縣立游泳代表隊12名男性選手為研究對象，隨機分成四組，每位受試者均以平衡次序法接受四種動態恢復強度。在100公尺捷泳負荷強度測驗後，進行20分鐘不同強度放鬆游，探用捷泳持續游，動態恢復強度為安靜休息組、輕度組（最佳成績秒數×165%）、中度動態恢復組（10分鐘最佳成績秒數×135%，10分鐘最佳成績秒數×165%）及中高度動態恢復組（最佳成績秒數×135%）共四組。於100公尺捷泳測驗前及測驗完後探取指尖血，再進行20分鐘動態恢復游，於游後第1及第3分鐘內量測血乳酸值、心跳率及心跳變異度。完成不同動態恢復強度之後，讓受試者靜態休息1小時，再進行200公尺捷泳測驗，並記錄成績。以重複量數單因子變異數分析(one-way ANOVA, repeated measures)，比較四組動態恢復強度對血乳酸排除、心跳率、心跳變異度及再測成績之差異情形，以α=.05為顯著水準。其研究結果如下：一、四組動態恢復強度下水前及100公尺捷泳測驗後之血乳酸均無差異（安靜組12.2±1.70mmol•L^(-1)、輕度組11.5±1.86mmol•L^(-1)、中度組11.9±1.77mmol•L^(-1)及中高度組11.2±1.87mmol•L^(-1)），但在完成20分鐘不同動態恢復強度後，以輕度組的血乳酸值(l.9±0.49mmol•L^(-1))顯著低於其他三組（安靜組5.0±1.55mmol•L^(-1)、中度組4.0±1.42mmol•L^(-1)及中高度組5.0±1.40mmol•L^(-1)，P<.05）。二、四組全速游及不同動態恢復強度下水前及100公尺捷泳測驗後之心跳率均無差異，但在完成20分鐘不同動態恢復強度後，中度組及中高度組之心跳率顯著高於其他兩組(p<.05)。三、四組全速游及不同動態恢復強度後200公尺捷泳再測成績，以輕度組的成績顯著優於其他三組(p<.05)。四、四組動態恢復強度下水前安靜心跳變異度並無差異，但經過20分鐘不同動態恢復強度後，輕度組之低頻顯著低於其他三組(p<.05)；高頻及總功率部分則顯著高於其他三組(p<.05)。本研究結論為四組動態恢復強度，以輕度組在訓練後對血乳酸清除、心跳變異度及200公尺捷泳再測成績顯著優於其他三組(p<.05)，因此，輕度動態恢復放鬆負荷可提供給游泳教練及選手作為100公尺捷泳比賽後放鬆恢復的強度指標。

The purpose of the study was to investigate the effect of four different intensities of dynamic recovery on post-training blood lactate and heart rate variability in swimmers. Twelve male swimmers from the Kaohsiung County Swimming Team were randomly divided into four groups. Each group participated in one recovery program on four nonconsecutive days in a counterbalanced order. After 100-m front crawl test, the participants received one of the four 20-min recovery program including inactive, low-intensity swimming (best record×165%), moderate-intensity swimming (best record×135% for 10 min, best record×165% for 10 min) and moderate-to-high-intensity swimming (best record×135% for 20 min). Blood samples were collected before and after 100-m front crawl. After 20-min recovery programs, heart rate, heart rate variability data and blood samples were collected at the end of the 1st and 3rd minute. After 1-hour break after recovery programs, the subjects were tested again for their 200-m front crawl time. Repeated-measures one-way ANOVA was used to compare the effects of different recovery programs on blood lactate clearance, heart rate and heart rate variability. The significant level was set at α=.05. The results revealed that 1. No significant difference existed among four recovery programs in blood lactate levels before and after 100-m front crawl (before: inactive: 1.9±0.56, low intensity: 1.8±0.56, moderate intensity: 2.2±0.52. moderate-to-high intensity: 2.0±0.38; after: inactive: 12.2±1.70 mmol•L^(-1), low intensity: 11.5±1.86 mmol•L^(-1), moderate intensity: 11.9±1.77 mmol•L^(-1), moderate-to-high intensity: 11.2±1.87 mmol•L^(-1)). However, the blood lactate was significantly lower after the low-intensity recovery program (1.9±0.49 mmol•L^(-1)) when compared with the other three programs (inactive: 5.0±1.55 mmol•L^(-1), moderate-intensity: 4.0±1.42 mmol•L^(-1), moderate-to-high intensity: 5.0±1.40 mmol•L^(-1), p<.05). 2. No significant difference in heart rate was found before and after 100-m front crawl. The heart rates after moderate-intensity and moderate-to-high-intensity recovery programs were significantly higher than the other two programs (p<.05). 3. The performance of the 200-m front crawl after low-intensity recovery program was significantly better than other programs (p<.05). 4. No significant difference was found in heart rate variability among the recovery programs before swimming; however, participants showed significantly lower low R-R volume, higher high frequency and total power after low intensity-recovery recovery training when compared to other three recovery programs (p<.05). In conclusion, the low-intensity dynamic recovery may be beneficial for clearance of blood lactate, favorable heart rate variability and better swimming performance. Our results suggest the low-intensity dynamic recovery may recommended for coaches or swimmers when designing recovery training programs.