Wyniki wyszukiwania - Biblioteka Nauki

1

Application of the arm-cranking 30-second Wingate Anaerobic Test (the WAnT) to assess power in amputee football players

100%

Nowak A. M. , Molik B. , Kosmol A. , Szczepaniak M. , Marszałek J.

Acta of Bioengineering and Biomechanics

|

2021

|

tom Vol. 23, no. 3

13--23

EN

Purpose: The aim of this work was to determine anaerobic performance in male amputee football players considering types and levels of limb impairment, playing position, anthropometric parameters, and comparing the findings to reference values. Relationship between parameters in the laboratory anaerobic test and the handgrip test was checked. Methods: The 30-second Wingate Anaerobic Test (peak power, mean power, relative peak power, relative mean power, time to achieve peak power, fatigue index) on the arm-crank ergometer (LODE ANGIO), the FUTREX 6100 (Futrex, Gaithersburg, USA) and the handgrip test were used in amputee football players (n = 23). Anthropometric measurements were collected. Results: There were no differences in anaerobic results between players considering types and levels of limb impairment. Forwards had significantly higher relative mean and peak power (p = 0.049, d = 0.82; p = 0.049, d = 0.81), and lower amputation-adjusted body mass index (p = 0.001, d = 1.50) than defenders. For peak power, 19 out 23 achieved, and for relative peak power, 22 out 23 achieved results from “average” to “elite”. Peak power strongly correlated to handgrip strength results. Conclusions: Amputee football requires a high level of power from players. Maintaining appropriate body composition is important for amputee football players to have better anaerobic performance during the game. The 30-second Wingate Anaerobic Test can be used to assess anaerobic performance in AF players. Sport-specific anaerobic performance laboratory tests and field-based tests using in indirect upper limbs’ peak power monitoring would be beneficial for coaches.

2

Wózek dźwigniowy dla osób z niepełnosprawnością narządu ruchu – alternatywna forma technologii wspomagającej poruszanie się

86%

Marszałek J. , Kosmol A. , Mróz A. , Wiszomirska I. , Błażkiewicz M. , Fiok K. , Molik B.

Niepełnosprawność - zagadnienia, problemy, rozwiązania

|

2018

|

nr 4(29)

97-109

PL

Materiał. W badaniu wzięło udział 20 osób z niepełnosprawnością narządu ruchu, na co dzień wykorzystujących wózek inwalidzki do przemieszczania się. Uczestnicy mieli za zadanie poruszać się na wózku inwalidzkim, który można napędzać za pomocą ciągów i za pomocą dźwigni (wózek 2 w 1) na bieżni mechanicznej z prędkością 3,5 km/h oraz 4,5 km/h w ustawieniu bieżni mechanicznej płasko (warunki poruszania się na wózku w terenie płaskim) w czasie 4 minut. Kolejność wyboru pierwszego sposobu napędzania była losowa. Podczas testów badano wskaźniki układu oddechowego, tj. minutowej wentylacji płuc (VE), objętości pochłanianego tlenu (VO2), objętości wydychanego dwutlenku węgla (VCO2) oraz układu krążenia, tj. częstotliwości skurczów serca (HR) za pomocą mobilnego ergospirometru K5 firmy Cosmed i czujnika HR firmy GARMIN. Wyniki. W przypadku poruszania się na bieżni z prędkością 3,5 km/h, jak i 4,5 km/h zaobserwowano istotne statystycznie różnice w parametrach krążeniowo-oddechowych podczas poruszania się na wózku napędzanym za pomocą dźwigni, a na wózku napędzanym za pomocą ciągów. W każdym przypadku wartości parametrów VE, VO2, VCO2 oraz HR były niższe w przypadku poruszania się na wózku napędzanym za pomocą dźwigni (p < 0,05). Podsumowanie. Jazda na wózku napędzanym za pomocą dźwigni o prędkości 3,5 km/h i 4,5 km/h była mniej wymagająca pod względem parametrów krążeniowo-oddechowych niż na wózku napędzanym za pomocą ciągów po powierzchni płaskiej. Wózek dźwigniowy jako technologia wspomagająca poruszanie się może być alternatywą dla wózka z ciągami w życiu codziennym osób z niepełnosprawnością narządu ruchu, w tym także w warunkach naturalnych – środowiskowych. Należy podkreślić, iż konieczna jest kontynuacja badań w kierunku możliwości manewrowania wózkiem dźwigniowym, w tym także konstrukcyjnych w kierunku pełnej oceny tej technologii wspomagającej.

EN

Background. The aim of this study was to examine differences between lever wheelchair propulsion and handrim wheelchair propulsion on a flat treadmill with different velocity among people with physical impairment. Methods. 20 people with physical impairment, wheelchair users participated in this study. They were asked to move on the wheelchair by levers and by handrims (2 in 1 wheelchair) on the flat treadmill, which was moving with 3.5 km/h and 4.5 km/h for four minutes each drive. Type of pushing was randomly chosen. Minute ventilation (VE), oxygen uptake (VO2), carbon dioxide output (VCO2) as well as heart rate (HR) were observed respectively by ergospirometer K5 Cosmed and by GARMIN sensor. Results. There were significant statistical differences in VE, VO2, VCO2 and HR parameters during lever wheelchair propulsion compare to handrim wheelchair propulsion in each movement on the treadmill (3.5 km/h as well as 4.5 km/h). All measured parameters were lower in lever wheelchair propulsion (p < 0,05). Conclusion. Lever wheelchair propulsion with 3.5 km/h and 4.5 km/h on a flat surface was significantly less demanding in terms of physiological parameters compare to handrim wheelchair propulsion. A lever wheelchair can be easily used as an alternative assistive technology for everyday wheelchair users, also in natural surroundings. There is a need to continue study about lever wheelchair maneuverability as well construction to fully assess this type of wheelchair.

3

Comparison of muscle activity during hand rim and lever wheelchair propulsion over flat terrain

72%

Błażkiewicz M. , Wiszomirska I. , Fiok K. , Mróz A. , Kosmol A. , Mikicin M. , Molik B. , Marszałek J.

Acta of Bioengineering and Biomechanics

|

2019

|

tom Vol. 21, no. 3

67--74

EN

The aim of this study was to compare the activity of upper limb muscles during hand rim wheelchair propulsion and lever wheelchair propulsion at two different velocity levels. Methods: Twenty male volunteers with physical impairments participated in this study. Their task was to push a lever wheelchair and a hand rim wheelchair on a mechanical wheelchair treadmill for 4 minutes at a speed of 3.5 km/h and 4.5 km/h in a flat race setting (conditions of moving over flat terrain). During these trials, activity of eight muscles of upper limbs were examined using surface electromyography. Results: The range of motion in the elbow joint was significantly higher in lever wheelchair propulsion (59.8 ± 2.43°) than in hand rim wheelchair propulsion (43.9 ± 0.26°). Such values of kinematics resulted in a different activity of muscles. All the muscles were more active during lever wheelchair propulsion at both velocity levels. The only exceptions were extensor and flexor carpi muscles which were more active during hand rim wheelchair propulsion due to the specificity of a grip. In turn, the examined change in the velocity (by 1 km/h) while moving over flat terrain also caused a different EMG timing of muscle activation depending on the type of propulsion. Conclusions: Lever wheelchair propulsion seems to be a good alternative to hand rim wheelchair propulsion owing to a different movement technique and a different EMG timing of muscle activity. Therefore, we believe that lever wheelchair propulsion should serve as supplement to traditional propulsion.