BACKGROUND/ OBJECTIVE: Reliable assessment of upper extremity anaerobic power in persons with cervical spinal cord injury (SCI) may indicate the ability to successfully and safely perform many daily activities. PURPOSE: To examine test-retest reliability of upper extremity Wingate anaerobic testing (WAnT) in persons with motor/sensory complete tetraplegia. METHODS: Forty-five persons with cervical-level SCI (15 individuals each at C5, C6, and C7 levels of injury) performed 2-arm WAnT bouts, with 2 to 4 days between bouts. Subjects performed the WAnT seated in their wheelchairs using a tabletop-mounted Monarch 834E ergometer. Resistance loads were applied relative to injury level, with 1%, 2%, and 3% of body mass applied to subjects with C5, C6, and C7 level injuries, respectively. All subjects were directed to crank the ergometer at maximal velocity for a 30-second period. Values of peak power (Ppeak) and mean power (Pmean) were determined using an SMI OptoSensor 2000 system. Ppeak and Pmean were compared between trials and between groups using 2-way analyses of variance for repeated measures. Coefficients of determination (r2) were calculated between trials. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in Ppeak or Pmean detected between the 2 trials of WAnT in the C5, C6, or C7 groups. Regression analyses revealed statistically significant associations between bouts for Pmean and Ppeak in each of the 3 groups (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Upper extremity WAnT is reliable for upper extremity anaerobic power assessment in persons with cervical SCI at or below the C5 level.
BACKGROUND/ OBJECTIVE: Reliable assessment of upper extremity anaerobic power in persons with cervical spinal cord injury (SCI) may indicate the ability to successfully and safely perform many daily activities. PURPOSE: To examine test-retest reliability of upper extremity Wingate anaerobic testing (WAnT) in persons with motor/sensory complete tetraplegia. METHODS: Forty-five persons with cervical-level SCI (15 individuals each at C5, C6, and C7 levels of injury) performed 2-arm WAnT bouts, with 2 to 4 days between bouts. Subjects performed the WAnT seated in their wheelchairs using a tabletop-mounted Monarch 834E ergometer. Resistance loads were applied relative to injury level, with 1%, 2%, and 3% of body mass applied to subjects with C5, C6, and C7 level injuries, respectively. All subjects were directed to crank the ergometer at maximal velocity for a 30-second period. Values of peak power (Ppeak) and mean power (Pmean) were determined using an SMI OptoSensor 2000 system. Ppeak and Pmean were compared between trials and between groups using 2-way analyses of variance for repeated measures. Coefficients of determination (r2) were calculated between trials. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in Ppeak or Pmean detected between the 2 trials of WAnT in the C5, C6, or C7 groups. Regression analyses revealed statistically significant associations between bouts for Pmean and Ppeak in each of the 3 groups (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Upper extremity WAnT is reliable for upper extremity anaerobic power assessment in persons with cervical SCI at or below the C5 level.