Course of gross mechanical efficiency in handrim wheelchair propulsion during rehabilitation of people with spinal cord injury: A prospective cohort study
Course of gross mechanical efficiency in handrim wheelchair propulsion during rehabilitation of people with spinal cord injury: A prospective cohort study
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.apmr.2004.11.025
复制
发表时间：
2005-07-01
影响因子：
4.3
通讯作者：
van der Woude, LH
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
de Groot, S;Dallmeijer, AJ;van der Woude, LH
目的：调查过程中的机械效率handrim轮椅推进在康复的科目（中）完全截瘫和tetraplegislation.Design：主题进行了测试，在开始的主动康复（t（1）），3个月后（t（2）），出院时从住院康复（t（3））。他们进行了两个3分钟的次极量踏车运动blockin a wheelchair.Setting：8康复中心在荷兰.Participants：92人（中）完全截瘫和四肢瘫痪.Interventions：Not applicable.Main Outcome Measures：机械效率值计算为每个块。机械效率的过程中进行了研究，使用测试时机（t（1）-t（3）），完整性和水平（截瘫或四肢瘫痪）的病变，功率输出作为自变量在一个多层次的回归analysis.Results：机械效率显着增加之间的t（1）和t（2）。在将损伤的水平和完整性及其与时间的相互作用添加到模型中后，块2显示截瘫受试者的机械效率显著高于四肢瘫痪受试者。四肢瘫痪的主题改善之间的t（1）和t（2）的机械效率与截瘫和四肢瘫痪的主题之间的差异不能解释的绝对和相对功率输出levels.Conclusions的差异：结果表明，在积极康复的前3个月的机械效率显着改善。截瘫患者的机械效率高于四肢瘫患者，而后者在t（1）和t（2）之间的改善更明显。
Objective: To investigate the course of mechanical efficiency of handrim wheelchair propulsion during rehabilitation of subjects with (in)complete paraplegia and tetraplegia.Design: Subjects were tested at the start of active rehabilitation (t(1)), 3 months later (t(2)), and when discharged from inpatient rehabilitation (t(3)). They performed two 3-minute submaximal treadmill exercise blocks in a wheelchair.Setting: Eight rehabilitation centers in the Netherlands.Participants: Ninety-two people with (in)complete paraplegia and tetraplegia.Interventions: Not applicable.Main Outcome Measures: Mechanical efficiency values were calculated for each block. The course of mechanical efficiency was investigated using test occasions (t(1)-t(3)) completeness and level (paraplegia or tetraplegia) of the lesion, and power output as independent variables in a multilevel regression analysis.Results: Mechanical efficiency significantly increased between t(1) and t(2) only. After adding level and completeness of the lesion and their interactions with time to the model, block 2 showed that subjects with paraplegia had a significantly higher mechanical efficiency than subjects with tetraplegia. Subjects with tetraplegia improved more between t(1) and t(2) Differences in mechanical efficiency between subjects with paraplegia and tetraplegia could not be explained by differences in absolute and relative power output levels.Conclusions: Results showed a significant improvement in mechanical efficiency during the first 3 months of active rehabilitation. Subjects with paraplegia showed a higher mechanical efficiency than did subjects with tetraplegia, whereas the latter showed more improvement between t(1) and t(2).