L Qi1,2, M Ferguson-Pell2, Z Salimi2, R Haennel2, A Ramadi2. 1. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian, Liaoning, China. 2. Faculty of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Each participant performed a series of wheelchair exercises equivalent in intensity to minimal functional speed (1 m s(-1)), functional walking speed (1.3 m s(-1)), a relatively challenging speed (1.6 m s(-1)) and a self-selected speed. Each participant also completed a graded exercise test (GXT) to volitional exhaustion (VO2peak). OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was (1) to assess the physical capacity of wheelchair users as they undertake typical mobility activities and (2) to investigate how closely the components of a differentiated model of perceived exertion mirror wheelchair users' own perception of exertion. METHODS: Eleven (eight males and three females) spinal cord-injured or congenitally impaired wheelchair-dependent participants volunteered for the study. Differentiated ratings of perceived exertion (RPE_arm and RPE_respiration) and oxygen uptake (VO2) and heart rate were recorded during each exercise. RESULTS: The mean comfortable speed at which the participants propelled their own wheelchairs on the wheelchair ergometer was 1.1±0.2 m s(-1). Speeds of 1 m s(-1) and 1.3 m s(-1) are typical of everyday functional propulsion. The corresponding RPE_respiration and RPE_arm ranged from 7 to 13 on the Borg scale; the %VO2peak measured in these trials ranged from 37 to 80% VO2peak. For propulsion intensities used in the present study-low, moderate, high and graded exercise intensity-no difference could be observed between RPE_respiration and RPE_arm. There were no significant differences between RPE_arm and RPE_respiration at the termination of the GXT. CONCLUSION: The current study showed potential for the use of RPE to assess and monitor daily wheelchair propulsion intensity in individuals with paraplegia.
STUDY DESIGN: Each participant performed a series of wheelchair exercises equivalent in intensity to minimal functional speed (1 m s(-1)), functional walking speed (1.3 m s(-1)), a relatively challenging speed (1.6 m s(-1)) and a self-selected speed. Each participant also completed a graded exercise test (GXT) to volitional exhaustion (VO2peak). OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was (1) to assess the physical capacity of wheelchair users as they undertake typical mobility activities and (2) to investigate how closely the components of a differentiated model of perceived exertion mirror wheelchair users' own perception of exertion. METHODS: Eleven (eight males and three females) spinal cord-injured or congenitally impaired wheelchair-dependent participants volunteered for the study. Differentiated ratings of perceived exertion (RPE_arm and RPE_respiration) and oxygen uptake (VO2) and heart rate were recorded during each exercise. RESULTS: The mean comfortable speed at which the participants propelled their own wheelchairs on the wheelchair ergometer was 1.1±0.2 m s(-1). Speeds of 1 m s(-1) and 1.3 m s(-1) are typical of everyday functional propulsion. The corresponding RPE_respiration and RPE_arm ranged from 7 to 13 on the Borg scale; the %VO2peak measured in these trials ranged from 37 to 80% VO2peak. For propulsion intensities used in the present study-low, moderate, high and graded exercise intensity-no difference could be observed between RPE_respiration and RPE_arm. There were no significant differences between RPE_arm and RPE_respiration at the termination of the GXT. CONCLUSION: The current study showed potential for the use of RPE to assess and monitor daily wheelchair propulsion intensity in individuals with paraplegia.
Authors: John P Lenton; Neil E Fowler; Lucas van der Woude; Victoria L Goosey-Tolfrey Journal: Appl Physiol Nutr Metab Date: 2008-10 Impact factor: 2.665
Authors: Melinda R Bolgar; Carol E Baker; Fredric L Goss; Elizabeth Nagle; Robert J Robertson Journal: J Sports Sci Med Date: 2010-12-01 Impact factor: 2.988
Authors: Rachel E Cowan; Mark S Nash; Jennifer L Collinger; Alicia M Koontz; Michael L Boninger Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2009-07 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: Fransiska M Bossuyt; Nathan S Hogaboom; Lynn A Worobey; Alicia M Koontz; Ursina Arnet; Michael L Boninger Journal: J Spinal Cord Med Date: 2019-03-18 Impact factor: 1.985
Authors: Sophie Bourassa; Krista L Best; Maxence Racine; Jaimie Borisoff; Jean Leblond; François Routhier Journal: J Rehabil Assist Technol Eng Date: 2020-04-08