Skip to main content
Log in

Physiological and biomechanical differences between wheelchair-dependent and able-bodied subjects during wheelchair ergometry

  • Published:
European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

The purpose of this study was to compare the physiological and biomechanical responses of wheelchair-dependent persons (WCD) to able-bodied persons (AB) during manual wheelchair ergometry. Five WCD and five AB performed a discontinuous wheelchair ergometer test starting at 12.8 W at 30 rev·min−1 (57 m·min−1) with increments of 7.0 W at 6-min intervals. Biomechanical data were collected 3.5 min into each stage followed by the collection of physiological data. After the fifth stage, peak oxygen consumption was determined by having the subject work against a resistance of 14.7–19.6 N at 30 rev · min−1. The WCD had significantly higher net mechanical efficiency at 26.7, 33.6 and 40.6 W in comparison to the AB. The WCD had significantly greater shoulder extension at the point of initial wheel contact as measured by the shoulder angle, while the AB had significantly greater shoulder range of motion at all work rates in comparison to the WCD. The results demonstrate that a significant physiological difference exists in the manner by which WCD and AB accomplish wheelchair ergometry. The biomechanical differences between AB and WCD were found to be a prominent factor contributing to the higher mechanical efficiency of WCD over AB. It was concluded that basic physiological and biomechanical differences exist between WCD and AB in manual wheelchair locomotion and that these differences are important considerations to the interpretation of data in wheelchair ergometry studies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • American College of Sports Medicine (1986) Guidelines for graded exercise testing and exercise prescription, 3rd edn. Lea and Febiger, Philadelphia, p 32

    Google Scholar 

  • Bidart Y, Maury M (1973) The circulatory behavior in complete chronic paraplegia. Paraplegia 11:1–24

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brattgard SO, Grimby G, Hook O (1970) Energy expenditure and heart rate driving a wheelchair ergometer. Scand J Rehabil Med 2:143–148

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Engel P, Hildebrandt G (1974) Wheelchair design — technology and physiological aspects. Proc R Soc Med 67:409–413

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Glaser RM, Sawka MN, Young RE, Suryaprasad A (1979) Metabolic and cardiopulmonary responses to wheelchair and bicycle ergometry. J Appl Physiol 46:1066–1070

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Knowlton RG, Fitzgerald PI, Sedlock DA (1981) The mechanical efficiency of wheelchair dependent women during wheelchair ergometry. Can J Appl Sport Sci 6:187–190

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sanderson DJ, Sommer HJ (1985) Kinematic features of wheelchair propulsion. J Biomech 18:423–429

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sawka MN, Glaser RM, Laubach LL, Al-Samkari O, Suryaprasad AG (1980a) Wheelchair exercise performance of the young, middle aged, and elderly. J Appl Physiol 50:824–828

    Google Scholar 

  • Sawka MN, Glaser RM, Wilde SW, Luhrte TC von (1980b) Metabolic and circulatory responses to wheelchair and arm crank exercise. J Appl Physiol 49:784–788

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sedlock DA, Knowlton RG, Fitzgerald PI (1988) The effects of arm crank training on the physiological responses to submaximal wheelchair ergometry. Eur J Appl Physiol 57:55–59

    Google Scholar 

  • Statistical Analysis System Institute (1982) SAS User's Guide. Cary, North Carolina

    Google Scholar 

  • Tahamont MV, Knowlton RG, Sawka MN, Miles DS (1986) Metabolic responses of women to exercise attributable to long term use of manual wheelchair. Paraplegia 24:311–317

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tupling SJ, Davis GM, Pierrynowski MR, Shephard RJ (1986) Arm strength and impulse generation: initiation of wheelchair movement by the physically disabled. Ergonomics 29:303–311

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Woude LHV van der, Groot G de, Hollander AP, Ingen Schenau GJ van, Rozendal RH (1986) Wheelchair ergonomics and physiological testing of prototypes. Ergonomics 29:1561–1573

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Brown, D.D., Knowlton, R.G., Hamill, J. et al. Physiological and biomechanical differences between wheelchair-dependent and able-bodied subjects during wheelchair ergometry. Europ. J. Appl. Physiol. 60, 179–182 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00839155

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00839155

Key words

Navigation