Cargando…

Biomechanical and physiological differences between synchronous and asynchronous low intensity handcycling during practice-based learning in able-bodied men

BACKGROUND: Originally, the cranks of a handcycle were mounted with a 180° phase shift (asynchronous). However, as handcycling became more popular, the crank mode switched to a parallel mounting (synchronous) over the years. Differences between both modes have been investigated, however, not into gr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kraaijenbrink, Cassandra, Vegter, Riemer J. K., Hensen, Alexander H. R., Wagner, Heiko, van der Woude, Lucas H. V.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7038515/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32093732
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12984-020-00664-8
_version_ 1783500658224136192
author Kraaijenbrink, Cassandra
Vegter, Riemer J. K.
Hensen, Alexander H. R.
Wagner, Heiko
van der Woude, Lucas H. V.
author_facet Kraaijenbrink, Cassandra
Vegter, Riemer J. K.
Hensen, Alexander H. R.
Wagner, Heiko
van der Woude, Lucas H. V.
author_sort Kraaijenbrink, Cassandra
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Originally, the cranks of a handcycle were mounted with a 180° phase shift (asynchronous). However, as handcycling became more popular, the crank mode switched to a parallel mounting (synchronous) over the years. Differences between both modes have been investigated, however, not into great detail for propulsion technique or practice effects. Our aim is to compare both crank modes from a biomechanical and physiological perspective, hence considering force and power production as a cause of physiological outcome measures. This is done within a practice protocol, as it is expected that motor learning takes place in the early stages of handcycling in novices. METHODS: Twelve able-bodied male novices volunteered to take part. The experiment consisted of a pre-test, three practice sessions and a post-test, which was subsequently repeated for both crank modes in a counterbalanced manner. In each session the participants handcycled for 3 × 4 minutes on a leveled motorized treadmill at 1.94 m/s. Inbetween sessions were 2 days of rest. 3D forces, handlebar and crank angle were measured on the left hand side. Kinematic markers were placed on the handcycle to monitor the movement on the treadmill. Lastly, breath-by-breath spirometry combined with heart-rate were continuously measured. The effects of crank mode and practice-based learning were analyzed using a two way repeated measures ANOVA, with synchronous vs asynchronous and pre-test vs post-test as within-subject factors. RESULTS: In the pre-test, asynchronous handcycling was less efficient than synchronous handcycling in terms of physiological strain, force production and timing. At the post-test, the metabolic costs were comparable for both modes. The force production was, also after practice, more efficient in the synchronous mode. External power production, crank rotation velocity and the distance travelled back and forwards on the treadmill suggest that asynchronous handcycling is more constant throughout the cycle. CONCLUSIONS: As the metabolic costs were reduced in the asynchronous mode, we would advise to include a practice period, when comparing both modes in scientific experiments. For handcycle users, we would currently advise a synchronous set-up for daily use, as the force production is more effective in the synchronous mode, even after practice.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7038515
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70385152020-03-02 Biomechanical and physiological differences between synchronous and asynchronous low intensity handcycling during practice-based learning in able-bodied men Kraaijenbrink, Cassandra Vegter, Riemer J. K. Hensen, Alexander H. R. Wagner, Heiko van der Woude, Lucas H. V. J Neuroeng Rehabil Research BACKGROUND: Originally, the cranks of a handcycle were mounted with a 180° phase shift (asynchronous). However, as handcycling became more popular, the crank mode switched to a parallel mounting (synchronous) over the years. Differences between both modes have been investigated, however, not into great detail for propulsion technique or practice effects. Our aim is to compare both crank modes from a biomechanical and physiological perspective, hence considering force and power production as a cause of physiological outcome measures. This is done within a practice protocol, as it is expected that motor learning takes place in the early stages of handcycling in novices. METHODS: Twelve able-bodied male novices volunteered to take part. The experiment consisted of a pre-test, three practice sessions and a post-test, which was subsequently repeated for both crank modes in a counterbalanced manner. In each session the participants handcycled for 3 × 4 minutes on a leveled motorized treadmill at 1.94 m/s. Inbetween sessions were 2 days of rest. 3D forces, handlebar and crank angle were measured on the left hand side. Kinematic markers were placed on the handcycle to monitor the movement on the treadmill. Lastly, breath-by-breath spirometry combined with heart-rate were continuously measured. The effects of crank mode and practice-based learning were analyzed using a two way repeated measures ANOVA, with synchronous vs asynchronous and pre-test vs post-test as within-subject factors. RESULTS: In the pre-test, asynchronous handcycling was less efficient than synchronous handcycling in terms of physiological strain, force production and timing. At the post-test, the metabolic costs were comparable for both modes. The force production was, also after practice, more efficient in the synchronous mode. External power production, crank rotation velocity and the distance travelled back and forwards on the treadmill suggest that asynchronous handcycling is more constant throughout the cycle. CONCLUSIONS: As the metabolic costs were reduced in the asynchronous mode, we would advise to include a practice period, when comparing both modes in scientific experiments. For handcycle users, we would currently advise a synchronous set-up for daily use, as the force production is more effective in the synchronous mode, even after practice. BioMed Central 2020-02-24 /pmc/articles/PMC7038515/ /pubmed/32093732 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12984-020-00664-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Kraaijenbrink, Cassandra
Vegter, Riemer J. K.
Hensen, Alexander H. R.
Wagner, Heiko
van der Woude, Lucas H. V.
Biomechanical and physiological differences between synchronous and asynchronous low intensity handcycling during practice-based learning in able-bodied men
title Biomechanical and physiological differences between synchronous and asynchronous low intensity handcycling during practice-based learning in able-bodied men
title_full Biomechanical and physiological differences between synchronous and asynchronous low intensity handcycling during practice-based learning in able-bodied men
title_fullStr Biomechanical and physiological differences between synchronous and asynchronous low intensity handcycling during practice-based learning in able-bodied men
title_full_unstemmed Biomechanical and physiological differences between synchronous and asynchronous low intensity handcycling during practice-based learning in able-bodied men
title_short Biomechanical and physiological differences between synchronous and asynchronous low intensity handcycling during practice-based learning in able-bodied men
title_sort biomechanical and physiological differences between synchronous and asynchronous low intensity handcycling during practice-based learning in able-bodied men
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7038515/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32093732
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12984-020-00664-8
work_keys_str_mv AT kraaijenbrinkcassandra biomechanicalandphysiologicaldifferencesbetweensynchronousandasynchronouslowintensityhandcyclingduringpracticebasedlearninginablebodiedmen
AT vegterriemerjk biomechanicalandphysiologicaldifferencesbetweensynchronousandasynchronouslowintensityhandcyclingduringpracticebasedlearninginablebodiedmen
AT hensenalexanderhr biomechanicalandphysiologicaldifferencesbetweensynchronousandasynchronouslowintensityhandcyclingduringpracticebasedlearninginablebodiedmen
AT wagnerheiko biomechanicalandphysiologicaldifferencesbetweensynchronousandasynchronouslowintensityhandcyclingduringpracticebasedlearninginablebodiedmen
AT vanderwoudelucashv biomechanicalandphysiologicaldifferencesbetweensynchronousandasynchronouslowintensityhandcyclingduringpracticebasedlearninginablebodiedmen