St Olavs Hospital, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Spinal Cord Injury Unit, 7006 Trondheim, Norway.
J Rehabil Med. 2013 Mar;45(3):254-9. doi: 10.2340/16501977-1098.
To compare peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak) between: (i) functional electrical stimulation lower extremity pulsed isometric muscle contractions combined with arm cycling (FES iso hybrid), (ii) functional electrical stimulation cycling combined with arm cycling (FES hybrid cycling), and (iii) arm cycling exercise (ACE) in individuals with spinal cord injury with level of injury above and below T6.
Cross-over repeated measures design. METHODS/PARTICIPANTS: Individuals with spinal cord injury (n = 15) with level of injury between C4 and T12, were divided into groups; above (spinal cord injury - high, n = 8) and below (spinal cord injury - low, n = 7) T6 level. On separate days, VO2peak was compared between: (i) ACE, (ii) FES iso hybrid, and (iii) FES hybrid cycling.
In the SCI-high group, FES iso hybrid increased VO2peak (17.6 (standard deviation (SD) 5.0) to 23.6 (SD 3.6) ml/kg/min; p = 0.001) and ventilation (50.4 (SD 20.8) to 58.2 (SD 20.7) l/min; p = 0.034) more than ACE. Furthermore, FES hybrid cycling resulted in a 6.8 ml/kg/min higher VO2peak (p = 0.001) and an 11.0 litres/minute (p = 0.001) higher ventilation. ACE peak workload was 10.5 W (p = 0.001) higher during FES hybrid cycling compared with ACE. In the spinal cord injury - low group, no significant differences were found between the modalities.
VO2peak increased when ACE was combined with FES iso hybrid or FES hybrid cycling in persons with spinal cord injury above the T6 level. Portable FES may serve as a less resource-demanding alternative to stationary FES cycling, and may have important implications for exercise prescription for spinal cord injury.
比较脊髓损伤水平高于和低于 T6 的个体中,(i)功能性电刺激下肢脉冲等长肌肉收缩联合手臂循环(FES iso 混合)、(ii)功能性电刺激循环联合手臂循环(FES 混合循环)和(iii)手臂循环运动(ACE)的峰值摄氧量(VO2peak)。
交叉重复测量设计。
方法/参与者:脊髓损伤水平在 C4 至 T12 之间的 15 名脊髓损伤个体(n=15)被分为两组;T6 以上(脊髓损伤-高,n=8)和 T6 以下(脊髓损伤-低,n=7)。在不同的日子里,分别比较以下各组的 VO2peak:(i)ACE、(ii)FES iso 混合和(iii)FES 混合循环。
在脊髓损伤-高组中,FES iso 混合使 VO2peak(17.6(标准差(SD)5.0)增加至 23.6(SD 3.6)ml/kg/min;p=0.001)和通气(50.4(SD 20.8)增加至 58.2(SD 20.7)l/min;p=0.034)比 ACE 更高。此外,FES 混合循环使 VO2peak 增加 6.8 ml/kg/min(p=0.001),通气增加 11.0 升/分钟(p=0.001)。与 ACE 相比,FES 混合循环时 ACE 的峰值工作负荷高 10.5 W(p=0.001)。在脊髓损伤-低组中,各模式之间无显著差异。
在 T6 以上的脊髓损伤个体中,当 ACE 与 FES iso 混合或 FES 混合循环结合时,VO2peak 增加。便携式 FES 可能是一种对资源要求较低的替代固定 FES 循环的方法,这对脊髓损伤的运动处方具有重要意义。