Good association between sprint power and aerobic peak power during asynchronuous arm-crank exercise in people with spinal cord injury

Sonja de Groot, Ingrid Kouwijzer, Linda J.M. Valent, Lucas H.V. van der Woude, Mark S. Nash, Rachel E. Cowan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Purpose: To (1) investigate the association between sprint power and aerobic power output (POpeakGXT) during a graded peak exercise test (GXT); and (2) validate the prediction models of POpeakGXT based on sprint power and personal and lesion characteristics. Materials and methods: Wheelchair users with tetraplegia (N = 35) and paraplegia (N = 58) performed a 30 s-Wingate test and GXT on an asynchronous arm-crank ergometer. Data were split into samples to develop and validate the model. Sprint power (POmeanWingate and POpeakWingate, respectively) and POpeakGXT were determined. Regression analyses were performed to develop POpeakGXT prediction models. Candidate independent variables included POmeanWingate or POpeakWingate, age (years), sex, body mass (kg) or BMI (kg/m2), time since injury (TSI, years) and lesion level (tetraplegia/paraplegia). The best model was validated by comparing the predicted POpeakGXT with measured POpeakGXT. Results: The best model (R2 = 0.76) to predict POpeakGXT included POmeanWingate, BMI and all other independent variables. No significant difference was found between measured (68 ± 35 W) and predicted POpeakGXT (68 ± 30 W, p = 0.97). The ICC was excellent (0.89 with 95% confidence intervals: 0.75–0.95). The 95% limits of agreement for the Bland–Altman plots were wide (−30 to 31 W). Conclusions: Strong associations were found between POmeanWingate and POpeakGXT. Although relative agreement was excellent, absolute agreement was low.Implications for rehabilitation There is a strong relationship between peak aerobic power output and sprint power output, both tested on an arm-crank ergometer, in people with spinal cord injury. A prediction model for peak aerobic power output, based on sprint power output and personal and lesion characteristics, showed a high explained variance. The predictive model can give a guideline for choosing the right graded exercise test protocol but should be used with caution.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalDisability and Rehabilitation
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2019

Fingerprint

Quadriplegia
Paraplegia
Spinal Cord Injuries
Exercise Test
Wheelchairs
Rehabilitation
Regression Analysis
Guidelines
Confidence Intervals
Wounds and Injuries

Keywords

  • aerobic exercise
  • anaerobic exercise
  • Exercise/physiology
  • rehabilitation/methods
  • spinal cord injury

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Rehabilitation

Cite this

Good association between sprint power and aerobic peak power during asynchronuous arm-crank exercise in people with spinal cord injury. / de Groot, Sonja; Kouwijzer, Ingrid; Valent, Linda J.M.; van der Woude, Lucas H.V.; Nash, Mark S.; Cowan, Rachel E.

In: Disability and Rehabilitation, 01.01.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{d078cb365c3944b28663878a4e7cdc35,
title = "Good association between sprint power and aerobic peak power during asynchronuous arm-crank exercise in people with spinal cord injury",
abstract = "Purpose: To (1) investigate the association between sprint power and aerobic power output (POpeakGXT) during a graded peak exercise test (GXT); and (2) validate the prediction models of POpeakGXT based on sprint power and personal and lesion characteristics. Materials and methods: Wheelchair users with tetraplegia (N = 35) and paraplegia (N = 58) performed a 30 s-Wingate test and GXT on an asynchronous arm-crank ergometer. Data were split into samples to develop and validate the model. Sprint power (POmeanWingate and POpeakWingate, respectively) and POpeakGXT were determined. Regression analyses were performed to develop POpeakGXT prediction models. Candidate independent variables included POmeanWingate or POpeakWingate, age (years), sex, body mass (kg) or BMI (kg/m2), time since injury (TSI, years) and lesion level (tetraplegia/paraplegia). The best model was validated by comparing the predicted POpeakGXT with measured POpeakGXT. Results: The best model (R2 = 0.76) to predict POpeakGXT included POmeanWingate, BMI and all other independent variables. No significant difference was found between measured (68 ± 35 W) and predicted POpeakGXT (68 ± 30 W, p = 0.97). The ICC was excellent (0.89 with 95{\%} confidence intervals: 0.75–0.95). The 95{\%} limits of agreement for the Bland–Altman plots were wide (−30 to 31 W). Conclusions: Strong associations were found between POmeanWingate and POpeakGXT. Although relative agreement was excellent, absolute agreement was low.Implications for rehabilitation There is a strong relationship between peak aerobic power output and sprint power output, both tested on an arm-crank ergometer, in people with spinal cord injury. A prediction model for peak aerobic power output, based on sprint power output and personal and lesion characteristics, showed a high explained variance. The predictive model can give a guideline for choosing the right graded exercise test protocol but should be used with caution.",
keywords = "aerobic exercise, anaerobic exercise, Exercise/physiology, rehabilitation/methods, spinal cord injury",
author = "{de Groot}, Sonja and Ingrid Kouwijzer and Valent, {Linda J.M.} and {van der Woude}, {Lucas H.V.} and Nash, {Mark S.} and Cowan, {Rachel E.}",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/09638288.2019.1625978",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Disability and Rehabilitation",
issn = "0963-8288",
publisher = "Informa Healthcare",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Good association between sprint power and aerobic peak power during asynchronuous arm-crank exercise in people with spinal cord injury

AU - de Groot, Sonja

AU - Kouwijzer, Ingrid

AU - Valent, Linda J.M.

AU - van der Woude, Lucas H.V.

AU - Nash, Mark S.

AU - Cowan, Rachel E.

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - Purpose: To (1) investigate the association between sprint power and aerobic power output (POpeakGXT) during a graded peak exercise test (GXT); and (2) validate the prediction models of POpeakGXT based on sprint power and personal and lesion characteristics. Materials and methods: Wheelchair users with tetraplegia (N = 35) and paraplegia (N = 58) performed a 30 s-Wingate test and GXT on an asynchronous arm-crank ergometer. Data were split into samples to develop and validate the model. Sprint power (POmeanWingate and POpeakWingate, respectively) and POpeakGXT were determined. Regression analyses were performed to develop POpeakGXT prediction models. Candidate independent variables included POmeanWingate or POpeakWingate, age (years), sex, body mass (kg) or BMI (kg/m2), time since injury (TSI, years) and lesion level (tetraplegia/paraplegia). The best model was validated by comparing the predicted POpeakGXT with measured POpeakGXT. Results: The best model (R2 = 0.76) to predict POpeakGXT included POmeanWingate, BMI and all other independent variables. No significant difference was found between measured (68 ± 35 W) and predicted POpeakGXT (68 ± 30 W, p = 0.97). The ICC was excellent (0.89 with 95% confidence intervals: 0.75–0.95). The 95% limits of agreement for the Bland–Altman plots were wide (−30 to 31 W). Conclusions: Strong associations were found between POmeanWingate and POpeakGXT. Although relative agreement was excellent, absolute agreement was low.Implications for rehabilitation There is a strong relationship between peak aerobic power output and sprint power output, both tested on an arm-crank ergometer, in people with spinal cord injury. A prediction model for peak aerobic power output, based on sprint power output and personal and lesion characteristics, showed a high explained variance. The predictive model can give a guideline for choosing the right graded exercise test protocol but should be used with caution.

AB - Purpose: To (1) investigate the association between sprint power and aerobic power output (POpeakGXT) during a graded peak exercise test (GXT); and (2) validate the prediction models of POpeakGXT based on sprint power and personal and lesion characteristics. Materials and methods: Wheelchair users with tetraplegia (N = 35) and paraplegia (N = 58) performed a 30 s-Wingate test and GXT on an asynchronous arm-crank ergometer. Data were split into samples to develop and validate the model. Sprint power (POmeanWingate and POpeakWingate, respectively) and POpeakGXT were determined. Regression analyses were performed to develop POpeakGXT prediction models. Candidate independent variables included POmeanWingate or POpeakWingate, age (years), sex, body mass (kg) or BMI (kg/m2), time since injury (TSI, years) and lesion level (tetraplegia/paraplegia). The best model was validated by comparing the predicted POpeakGXT with measured POpeakGXT. Results: The best model (R2 = 0.76) to predict POpeakGXT included POmeanWingate, BMI and all other independent variables. No significant difference was found between measured (68 ± 35 W) and predicted POpeakGXT (68 ± 30 W, p = 0.97). The ICC was excellent (0.89 with 95% confidence intervals: 0.75–0.95). The 95% limits of agreement for the Bland–Altman plots were wide (−30 to 31 W). Conclusions: Strong associations were found between POmeanWingate and POpeakGXT. Although relative agreement was excellent, absolute agreement was low.Implications for rehabilitation There is a strong relationship between peak aerobic power output and sprint power output, both tested on an arm-crank ergometer, in people with spinal cord injury. A prediction model for peak aerobic power output, based on sprint power output and personal and lesion characteristics, showed a high explained variance. The predictive model can give a guideline for choosing the right graded exercise test protocol but should be used with caution.

KW - aerobic exercise

KW - anaerobic exercise

KW - Exercise/physiology

KW - rehabilitation/methods

KW - spinal cord injury

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85067559344&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85067559344&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/09638288.2019.1625978

DO - 10.1080/09638288.2019.1625978

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85067559344

JO - Disability and Rehabilitation

JF - Disability and Rehabilitation

SN - 0963-8288

ER -