Center for Human Movement Sciences, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Peter Harrison Centre for Disability Sports, School of Sport Exercise and Health Sciences, Loughborough University, Loughborough, United Kingdom.
PLoS One. 2022 Sep 6;17(9):e0274255. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0274255. eCollection 2022.
This study aims to evaluate whether a test protocol with standardized and individualized resistance settings leads to valid wheelchair Wingate tests (WAnT) and graded exercise tests (GXT) in healthy novices. Twenty able-bodied individuals (10M/10F, age 23 ± 2 years, body mass 72 ± 11 kg) performed an isometric strength test, sprint test, WAnT and GXT on a wheelchair ergometer. Using a previously developed set of regression equations, individuals' isometric strength outcome was used to estimate the WAnT result (P30est), from which an effective individual WAnT resistance was derived. The subsequently measured WAnT outcome (P30meas) was used to estimate the GXT outcome (POpeakest) and to scale the individual GXT resistance steps. Estimated and measured outcomes were compared. The WAnT protocol was considered valid when maximal velocity did not exceed 3 m·s-1; the GXT protocol was considered valid when test duration was 8-12 min. P30est did not significantly differ from P30meas, while one participant did not have a valid WanT, as maximal velocity exceeded 3 m·s-1. POpeakest was 10% higher than POpeakmeas, and six participants did not reach a valid GXT: five participants had a test duration under 8 min and one participant over 12 min. The isometric strength test can be used to individually scale the WAnT protocol. The WAnT outcome scaled the protocol for the GXT less accurately, resulting in mostly shorter-than-desired test durations. In conclusion, the evaluated standardized and individualized test protocol was valid for the WAnT but less valid for the GXT among a group of novices. Before implementing the standardized individual test protocol on a broader scale, e.g. among paralympic athletes, it should be evaluated among different athletic wheelchair-dependent populations.
本研究旨在评估标准化和个体化阻力设置的测试方案是否能在健康新手人群中得出有效的轮椅瓦氏测试（WAnT）和递增负荷运动测试（GXT）结果。20 名健康的成年人（10 男/10 女，年龄 23 ± 2 岁，体重 72 ± 11 公斤）在轮椅测功计上进行了等长力量测试、冲刺测试、WAnT 和 GXT。使用之前开发的一组回归方程，将个体的等长力量测试结果用于估计 WAnT 结果（P30est），由此得出有效的个体 WAnT 阻力。随后测量的 WAnT 结果（P30meas）用于估计 GXT 结果（POpeakest）并调整个体 GXT 阻力步骤。比较了估计和测量的结果。当最大速度不超过 3 m·s-1 时，WAnT 方案被认为是有效的；当测试持续时间为 8-12 分钟时，GXT 方案被认为是有效的。P30est 与 P30meas 无显著差异，而有一名参与者的 WAnT 无效，因为最大速度超过 3 m·s-1。POpeakest 比 POpeakmeas 高出 10%，有六名参与者没有达到有效的 GXT：五名参与者的测试持续时间低于 8 分钟，一名参与者的测试持续时间超过 12 分钟。等长力量测试可用于个体化调整 WAnT 方案。WAnT 结果对 GXT 方案的调整不太准确，导致测试持续时间大多比预期的要短。总之，在一组新手人群中，评估的标准化和个体化测试方案对 WAnT 是有效的，但对 GXT 的有效性较低。在更广泛地实施标准化个体测试方案之前，例如在残奥会运动员中，应该在不同的依赖轮椅的运动人群中进行评估。
