van der Scheer Jan W, de Groot Sonja, Vegter Riemer J K, Veeger Dirkjan H E J, van der Woude Lucas H V
University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Center for Human Movement Sciences, The Netherlands.
University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Center for Human Movement Sciences, The Netherlands; Amsterdam Rehabilitation Research Center, Reade, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Med Eng Phys. 2014 Apr;36(4):432-8. doi: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2014.01.003. Epub 2014 Feb 14.
To evaluate whether outcomes based on stopwatch time and power output (PO) over a 15m-overground wheelchair sprint test can be used to assess wheelchair-specific anaerobic work capacity, by studying their relationship with outcomes on a Wingate-based 30s-wheelchair ergometer sprint (WAnT).
Able-bodied persons (N=19, 10 men, aged 18-26 y) performed a 15m overground sprint test in an instrumented wheelchair and a WAnT. 15m-outcomes were based on stopwatch time (time and mean velocity over 15m) and on PO (primary outcome: highest mean unilateral PO over successive 5s-intervals (P5-15m)). WAnT-outcomes were mean unilateral PO over 30s and the highest mean unilateral PO over successive 5s-intervals. Correlation coefficients (Pearson's r) and coefficients of determination (R(2)) were calculated between 15m-sprint outcomes and WAnT-outcomes.
Time over 15m (7.2s (± 1.0)) was weakly related to WAnT-outcomes (r=-0.61 and -0.60, R(2)=0.38 and 0.36, p<0.01), similar to mean velocity over 15m (2.1 m·s(-1) (± 0.3), R(2)=0.43 and 0.39, p<0.01). P5-15m (38.1W (± 14.0)) showed a moderate relationship to WAnT-outcomes (r=0.77 and 0.75, R(2)=0.59 and 0.56, p<0.001).
It seems that outcomes based on stopwatch time over a 15m-overground sprint cannot be used to assess wheelchair-specific anaerobic work capacity, in contrast to an outcome based on PO (P5-15m). The 15m-sprint with an instrumented wheel can be implemented in rehabilitation practice and research settings when WAnT equipment is not available, although care is needed when interpreting P5-15m as an outcome of anaerobic work capacity given that it seems more skill-dependent than the WAnT.
通过研究基于秒表计时和功率输出(PO)的15米地面轮椅短跑测试结果与基于温盖特30秒轮椅测力计短跑(WAnT)结果之间的关系,评估这些结果是否可用于评估轮椅特定的无氧工作能力。
19名健全人(10名男性,年龄18 - 26岁)在装有仪器的轮椅上进行15米地面短跑测试和WAnT测试。15米短跑测试结果基于秒表计时(15米的时间和平均速度)和PO(主要结果:连续5秒间隔内的最高平均单侧PO(P5 - 15米))。WAnT测试结果是30秒内的平均单侧PO以及连续5秒间隔内的最高平均单侧PO。计算15米短跑测试结果与WAnT测试结果之间的相关系数(皮尔逊r)和决定系数(R²)。
15米用时(7.2秒(±1.0))与WAnT测试结果的相关性较弱(r = -0.61和 -0.60,R² = 0.38和0.36,p < 0.01),与15米平均速度(2.1米·秒⁻¹(±0.3),R² = 0.43和0.39,p < 0.01)情况类似。P5 - 15米(38.1瓦(±14.0))与WAnT测试结果呈现中度相关性(r = 0.77和0.75,R² = 0.59和0.56,p < 0.001)。
与基于PO(P5 - 15米)的结果不同,基于15米地面短跑秒表计时的结果似乎不能用于评估轮椅特定的无氧工作能力。当没有WAnT设备时,装有仪器的轮椅进行的15米短跑可应用于康复实践和研究环境中,不过鉴于P5 - 15米似乎比WAnT更依赖技能,在将其解释为无氧工作能力的结果时需谨慎。