Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
Bioenergetics and Biomechanics of Handcycling at Submaximal Speeds in Athletes with a Spinal Cord Injury.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Fischer Gabriela, Figueiredo Pedro, Ardigò Luca Paolo
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: A study aimed at comparing bioenergetics and biomechanical parameters between athletes with tetraplegia and paraplegia riding race handbikes at submaximal speeds in ecological conditions.
METHODS: Five athletes with tetraplegia (C6-T1, 43 ± 6 yrs, 63 ± 14 kg) and 12 athletes with paraplegia (T4-S5, 44 ± 7 yrs, 72 ± 12 kg) rode their handbikes at submaximal speeds under metabolic measurements. A deceleration method (coasting down) was applied to calculate the rolling resistance and frontal picture of each participant was taken to calculate air resistance. The net overall Mechanical Efficiency (Eff) was calculated by dividing external mechanical work to the corresponding Metabolic Power.
RESULTS: Athletes with tetraplegia reached a lower aerobic speed (4.7 ± 0.6 m s-1 vs. 7.1 ± 0.9 m s-1, P = 0.001) and Mechanical Power (54 ± 15 W vs. 111 ± 25 W, P = 0.001) compared with athletes with paraplegia. The metabolic cost was around 1 J kg-1 m-1 for both groups. The Eff values (17 ± 2% vs. 19 ± 3%, P = 0.262) suggested that the handbike is an efficient assisted locomotion device.
CONCLUSION: Handbikers with tetraplegia showed lower aerobic performances but a similar metabolic cost compared with handbikers with paraplegia at submaximal speeds in ecological conditions.
METHODS: Five athletes with tetraplegia (C6-T1, 43 ± 6 yrs, 63 ± 14 kg) and 12 athletes with paraplegia (T4-S5, 44 ± 7 yrs, 72 ± 12 kg) rode their handbikes at submaximal speeds under metabolic measurements. A deceleration method (coasting down) was applied to calculate the rolling resistance and frontal picture of each participant was taken to calculate air resistance. The net overall Mechanical Efficiency (Eff) was calculated by dividing external mechanical work to the corresponding Metabolic Power.
RESULTS: Athletes with tetraplegia reached a lower aerobic speed (4.7 ± 0.6 m s-1 vs. 7.1 ± 0.9 m s-1, P = 0.001) and Mechanical Power (54 ± 15 W vs. 111 ± 25 W, P = 0.001) compared with athletes with paraplegia. The metabolic cost was around 1 J kg-1 m-1 for both groups. The Eff values (17 ± 2% vs. 19 ± 3%, P = 0.262) suggested that the handbike is an efficient assisted locomotion device.
CONCLUSION: Handbikers with tetraplegia showed lower aerobic performances but a similar metabolic cost compared with handbikers with paraplegia at submaximal speeds in ecological conditions.