Energy cost of propulsion in standard and ultralight wheelchairs in people with spinal cord injuries

被引:78
作者
Beekman, CE
Miller-Porter, L
Schoneberger, M
机构
[1] Univ So Calif, Rancho Los Amigos Med Ctr, Spinal Injury & Pediat Serv, Phys Therapy Dept, Downey, CA 90242 USA
[2] Rancho Los Amigos Med Ctr, Phys Therapy Dept, Adult Orthoped & Outpatient Serv, Downey, CA USA
[3] Rancho Los Amigos Med Ctr, Spinal Injury Serv, Downey, CA USA
来源
PHYSICAL THERAPY | 1999年 / 79卷 / 02期
关键词
energy cost; paraplegia; spinal cord injury; tetraplegia; wheelchair;
D O I
10.1093/ptj/79.2.146
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background and Purpose. Wheelchair- and subject-related factors influence the efficiency of wheelchair propulsion. The purpose of this study was to compare wheelchair propulsion in ultralight and standard wheelchairs in people with different levels of spinal cord injury. Subjects. Seventy-four subjects (mean age=26.2 years, SD=7.14, range=17-50) with spinal cord injury resulting in motor loss (30 with tetraplegia and 44 with paraplegia) were studied. Method. Each subject propelled standard and ultralight wheelchairs around an outdoor track at self-selected speeds, while data were collected at 4 predetermined intervals. Speed, distance traveled, and oxygen cost ((V) over dot (O2) mL/kg/m) were compared by wheelchair, group, and over time, using a Bonferroni correction. Results. In the ultralight wheelchair, speed and distance traveled were greater for both subjects with paraplegia and subjects with tetraplegia, whereas (V) over dot (O2) was less only for subjects with paraplegia. Subjects with paraplegia propelled faster and farther than did subjects with tetraplegia. Conclusion and Discussion. The ultralight wheelchair improved the efficiency of propulsion in the tested subjects. Subjects with tetraplegia, especially at the C6 level, are limited in their ability to propel a wheelchair.
引用
收藏
页码:146 / 158
页数:13
相关论文
共 43 条
[1]  
American Spinal Injury Association, 1996, INT STAND NEUR FUNCT
[2]   LIMITATIONS OF KINEMATICS IN THE ASSESSMENT OF WHEELCHAIR PROPULSION IN ADULTS AND CHILDREN WITH SPINAL-CORD INJURY [J].
BEDNARCZYK, JH ;
SANDERSON, DJ .
PHYSICAL THERAPY, 1995, 75 (04) :281-289
[3]  
Blessey R L, 1976, Phys Ther, V56, P1019
[4]  
BRATTGARD SO, 1970, SCAND J REHABIL MED, V22, P143
[5]  
BRUBAKER C, 1990, J REHABIL RES DEV, P37
[6]   WALKING AND WHEELCHAIR ENERGETICS IN PERSONS WITH PARAPLEGIA [J].
CERNY, K ;
WATERS, R ;
HISLOP, H ;
PERRY, J .
PHYSICAL THERAPY, 1980, 60 (09) :1133-1139
[7]  
COOPER R A, 1990, Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, V27, P295, DOI 10.1682/JRRD.1990.07.0297
[8]   MAXIMAL EXERCISE RESPONSES OF TETRAPLEGICS AND PARAPLEGICS [J].
COUTTS, KD ;
RHODES, EC ;
MCKENZIE, DC .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSIOLOGY, 1983, 55 (02) :479-482
[9]   FUNCTIONAL REACH IN WHEELCHAIR USERS - THE EFFECTS OF TRUNK AND LOWER-EXTREMITY STABILIZATION [J].
CURTIS, KA ;
KINDLIN, CM ;
REICH, KM ;
WHITE, DE .
ARCHIVES OF PHYSICAL MEDICINE AND REHABILITATION, 1995, 76 (04) :360-367
[10]  
ERIKSSON P, 1988, SCAND J REHABIL MED, V20, P141