Literature DB >> 27344234

A comparison of energy consumption between the use of a walking frame, crutches and a Stride-on rehabilitation scooter.

Nimesh Patel1, Timothy Batten2, Andrew Roberton2, Doyo Enki3, Guy Wansbrough2, James Davis2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Following foot and ankle surgery, patients may be required to mobilise non-weight bearing, requiring a walking aid such as crutches, walking frame or a Stride-on rehabilitation scooter, which aims to reduce the amount of work required. The energy consumption of mobilising using a Stride-on scooter has not previously been investigated, and we aim to establish this.
METHODS: Ten healthy volunteers (5 males:5 females) aged 20-40 years mobilised independently, then with each mobility device for 3min at 1km/h on a treadmill, with rest periods, whilst undergoing Cardio-Pulmonary Exercise Testing (CPET). Oxygen consumption (VO2), carbon dioxide excretion (VCO2), minute ventilation (MV), respiratory rate (RR) and pulse (HR) were measured at baseline, and after 3min of walking, without and with all 3 devices. Wilcoxon signed rank test was carried out to calculate significance with non-parametric values with Bonferroni correction.
RESULTS: Three-point crutch mobilisation demonstrated significant increases in VO2 (0.7L), VCO2 (0.7L), MV (16.7L/min), pulse (24.8bpm) and RR (11.4breaths/min) compared to walking (p<0.05). Mobilisation with a frame produced significant (p<0.05) increases compared to walking; VO2 (0.7L), VCO2 (0.7L), MV (18.3L/min), pulse (35.9bpm), and RR (11.7breaths/min). Tests using the Stride-on demonstrated no significant increase compared to walking with regards to VO2 (0.1L; p=0.959), VCO2 (0.2L; p=0.332), pulse (10.1bpm; p=0.575), and RR (4.7breaths/min; p=0.633). The MV was significantly higher compared to walking (4.3L/min; p<0.05). DISCUSSION: Energy required for unit distance ambulation with a Stride-on device is similar to walking, and significantly lower than with a walking frame in single legged stance and three-point crutch mobilisation. This justifies its use as part of routine practice aiding early mobilisation of patients requiring restricted weight bearing or single legged weight bearing, especially in those with reduced cardio-pulmonary reserve as it is less physiologically demanding and does not rely on upper body strength.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Crutches; Energy consumption; Energy efficiency; Frame; Lower limb injuries; Stride-on; Walking aids

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27344234     DOI: 10.1016/j.foot.2016.04.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Foot (Edinb)        ISSN: 0958-2592


  3 in total

1.  Implications of Walking Aid Selection for Nonweightbearing Ambulation on Stance Limb Plantar Force, Walking Speed, Perceived Exertion, and Device Preference in Healthy Adults 50 Years of Age and Older.

Authors:  David C Kingston; Sarah Ferwerda; Curtis Fontaine; Marhanda Keeping; Jeffrey Stewart; Rachel Ward; Jenelle Zapski; Kassondra Collins; Samuel K Essien; Audrey R Zucker-Levin
Journal:  Foot Ankle Orthop       Date:  2021-03-19

2.  EMG Activity With Use of a Hands-Free Single Crutch vs a Knee Scooter.

Authors:  Cuyler Dewar; Terry L Grindstaff; Brooke Farmer; Morgan Sainsbury; Sam Gay; Weston Kroes; Kevin D Martin
Journal:  Foot Ankle Orthop       Date:  2021-12-08

3.  Knee Scooter-Related Injuries: A Survey of Foot and Ankle Orthopedic Surgeons.

Authors:  Rafa Rahman; Brett A Shannon; James R Ficke
Journal:  Foot Ankle Orthop       Date:  2020-03-30
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.