Steering Does Affect Biophysical Responses in Asynchronous, but Not Synchronous Submaximal Handcycle Ergometry in Able-Bodied Men.
crank mode
cyclic exercise
ergometry
handcycle technique
mechanical efficiency
upper body exercise
Journal
Frontiers in sports and active living
ISSN: 2624-9367
Titre abrégé: Front Sports Act Living
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101765780
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
14
07
2021
accepted:
27
09
2021
entrez:
11
11
2021
pubmed:
12
11
2021
medline:
12
11
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Real-life daily handcycling requires combined propulsion and steering to control the front wheel. Today, the handcycle cranks are mostly mounted synchronously unlike the early handcycle generations. Alternatively, arm cycle ergometers do not require steering and the cranks are mostly positioned asynchronously. The current study aims to evaluate the effects of combining propulsion and steering requirements on synchronous and asynchronous submaximal handcycle ergometry. We hypothesize that asynchronous handcycling with steering results in the mechanically least efficient condition, due to compensation for unwanted rotations that are not seen in synchronous handcycling, regardless of steering. Sixteen able-bodied male novices volunteered in this lab-based experiment. The set-up consisted of a handcycle ergometer with 3D force sensors at each crank that also allows "natural" steering. Four submaximal steady-state (60 rpm, ~35 W) exercise conditions were presented in a counterbalanced order: synchronous with a fixed steering axis, synchronous with steering, asynchronous with a fixed axis and asynchronous with steering. All participants practiced 3 × 4 mins with 30 mins rest in between every condition. Finally, they did handcycle for 4 mins in each of the four conditions, interspaced with 10 mins rest, while metabolic outcomes, kinetics and kinematics of the ergometer were recorded. The additional steering component did not influence velocity, torque and power production during synchronous handcycling and therefore resulted in an equal metabolically efficient handcycling configuration compared to the fixed condition. Contrarily, asynchronous handcycling with steering requirements showed a reduced mechanical efficiency, as velocity around the steering axis increased and torque and power production were less effective. Based on the torque production around the crank and steering axes, neuromuscular compensation strategies seem necessary to prevent steering movements in the asynchronous mode. To practice or test real-life daily synchronous handcycling, a synchronous crank set-up of the ergometer is advised, as exercise performance in terms of mechanical efficiency, metabolic strain, and torque production is independent of steering requirements in that mode. Asynchronous handcycling or arm ergometry demands a different handcycle technique in terms of torque production and results in higher metabolic responses than synchronous handcycling, making it unsuitable for testing.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34761216
doi: 10.3389/fspor.2021.741258
pmc: PMC8572844
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
741258Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 Kraaijenbrink, Vegter, Ostertag, Janssens, Vanlandewijck, van der Woude and Wagner.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin. 2012;15(3):295-301
pubmed: 21756121
J Rehabil Med. 2018 Jun 15;50(6):563-568
pubmed: 29756632
J Appl Biomech. 2013 Dec;29(6):687-95
pubmed: 23343659
Eur J Appl Physiol. 2012 Mar;112(3):983-9
pubmed: 21717120
J Med Eng Technol. 2009;33(2):151-7
pubmed: 19205993
Med Eng Phys. 2012 Jan;34(1):78-84
pubmed: 21798789
Ergonomics. 2009 Oct;52(10):1276-86
pubmed: 19626501
Disabil Rehabil. 2021 May;43(10):1429-1442
pubmed: 31656102
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2006 Jul;21(6):560-6
pubmed: 16510220
J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2008 Aug;18(4):598-605
pubmed: 17337211
Int J Sports Med. 2008 Aug;29(8):630-8
pubmed: 18213544
J Rehabil Res Dev. 2011;48(9):1049-60
pubmed: 22234710
Int J Sports Med. 2004 Nov;25(8):622-6
pubmed: 15532007
J Rehabil Res Dev. 2008;45(9):1295-302
pubmed: 19319754
Eur J Appl Physiol. 2008 Jan;102(2):189-94
pubmed: 17909841
Eur J Sport Sci. 2020 Aug;20(7):926-934
pubmed: 31566476
Disabil Rehabil. 2020 Sep 9;:1-15
pubmed: 32905740
J Spinal Cord Med. 2013 Jul;36(4):376-82
pubmed: 23820153
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2018 Jun 26;15(1):56
pubmed: 29940986
Can J Sport Sci. 1992 Dec;17(4):338-45
pubmed: 1330274
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2015 Mar 10;12:26
pubmed: 25889389
Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol. 1995;72(1-2):111-4
pubmed: 8789580
J Rehabil Med. 2017 Apr 6;49(4):289-303
pubmed: 28350415
Spinal Cord. 1999 Aug;37(8):569-74
pubmed: 10455533
Int J Sports Med. 2008 Sep;29(9):746-52
pubmed: 18302076
Med Eng Phys. 2008 Jun;30(5):574-80
pubmed: 17709272
IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2014 Jan;22(1):104-13
pubmed: 24122567
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2020 Feb 24;17(1):29
pubmed: 32093732
Disabil Rehabil. 2020 Feb;42(3):400-409
pubmed: 30507314
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1983;15(4):295-8
pubmed: 6621319
Ergonomics. 1986 Dec;29(12):1561-73
pubmed: 3102225
J Med Eng Technol. 2000 Nov-Dec;24(6):242-9
pubmed: 11315650
J Sports Sci. 2007 Feb 15;25(4):453-60
pubmed: 17365532
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1992 Jan;24(1):100-7
pubmed: 1548983
J Spinal Cord Med. 2019 May;42(3):272-280
pubmed: 29334345
Scand J Rehabil Med. 1970;2(2):92-8
pubmed: 5523831
Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2014 Apr;24(2):386-94
pubmed: 22989023
Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol. 1998 Sep;78(4):346-52
pubmed: 9754975
Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2020 Feb;30(2):361-369
pubmed: 31621945