Efficiency and perceived exertion of manual wheelchair propulsion: a physiological comparison of push vs pull wheeling

Habibi, Alireza; MacGillivray, Megan K.; Kalra, Harleen; Sawatzky, Bonita

doi:10.1080/03091902.2021.1891307

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Power output is then calculated to determine wheeling efficiency. In a recent paper on standard wheeling versus a backward row-like wheeling, velocity was constant and power output was measured [ 26 ]. Since velocity is meaningless to compare between ACE and AROW, we used workload as the constant instead.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Acute physiological comparison of sub-maximal exercise on a novel adapted rowing machine and arm crank ergometry in people with a spinal cord injury

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Study design Non-randomized crossover trial. Objectives The objective of this study was to assess the oxygen uptake during exercise using the Adapted ROWing machine (AROW) compared to the more commonly used Arm Crank Ergometry (ACE) for people with spinal cord injury/disease (SCI/D) with or without trunk stability. Setting Canada, Vancouver. Methods Participants were from a convenience sample of 14 adults with SCI/D (age 21–63 y) which include those with lumbar to low cervical impairments currently exercising at least once per week using cardiovascular exercise equipment at our Physical Activity Research Centre. The interventions were non-randomized steady-state exercise bouts at self-selected low and moderate workloads on the AROW and ACE for 5 min each. Our primary outcomes were the rate of oxygen consumption (mL/kg/min) and the Borg 0–10 Rating Scale of Perceived Exertion (RPE). Results A repeated measures two-way ANOVA ( p < 0.05) indicated that exercising on the AROW resulted significantly greater oxygen consumption and perceived exertion than ACE at similar sub-maximal workloads which may be explained by the differences in efficiency between the devices (Partial eta squared = 0.84, F stat = 48.25; Partial eta squared = 0.86, F stat = 53.54). Conclusions We have demonstrated that this form of upper extremity exercise had a greater RPE and VO 2 on the ACE at a given workload. Thus, the AROW could provide a functional upper extremity workout that can be used for daily exercise for those with varying levels of SCI.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%