We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Comparison of overground and treadmill propulsion patterns of manual wheelchair users with tetraplegia.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this investigation was to compare overground and treadmill propulsion patterns in persons with tetraplegia.
METHODS: In this case series study, we recruited eight adult subjects with tetraplegia (5 men and 3 women, aged 32.5 ± 9.5). All subjects used manual wheelchairs. We used a video motion capture system to record movements as the subject manually wheeled overground and on a treadmill. We classified propulsion patterns into one of four patterns and measured five different geometric variables of each pattern. We compared them statistically using ANOVA.
RESULTS: There were significant differences in max height/max length x 100 (H/L%) between propulsion over ground (mean 20% ± 15.3/Lhand, mean 21.3% ± 16.5/Rhand) versus propulsion on treadmill surfaces (roller: mean 30.9% ± 11.2/Lhand, mean 33.5% ± 12.8/Rhand; belted: mean 27.7% ± 8.7/Lhand, mean 34.9% ± 14.2/Rhand) and between the left and right hand.
CONCLUSION: Results indicated area and H/L% were different among the three surface types and between right and left sides. Caution must be used in extrapolating treadmill results to propulsion over ground or in assuming bilateral symmetry.
METHODS: In this case series study, we recruited eight adult subjects with tetraplegia (5 men and 3 women, aged 32.5 ± 9.5). All subjects used manual wheelchairs. We used a video motion capture system to record movements as the subject manually wheeled overground and on a treadmill. We classified propulsion patterns into one of four patterns and measured five different geometric variables of each pattern. We compared them statistically using ANOVA.
RESULTS: There were significant differences in max height/max length x 100 (H/L%) between propulsion over ground (mean 20% ± 15.3/Lhand, mean 21.3% ± 16.5/Rhand) versus propulsion on treadmill surfaces (roller: mean 30.9% ± 11.2/Lhand, mean 33.5% ± 12.8/Rhand; belted: mean 27.7% ± 8.7/Lhand, mean 34.9% ± 14.2/Rhand) and between the left and right hand.
CONCLUSION: Results indicated area and H/L% were different among the three surface types and between right and left sides. Caution must be used in extrapolating treadmill results to propulsion over ground or in assuming bilateral symmetry.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app