Comparison of the 6-Min Propulsion and Arm Crank Ergometer Tests to Assess Aerobic Fitness in Manual Wheelchair Users With a Spinal Cord Injury
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVE: The 6-Min Manual Wheelchair Propulsion Test is proposed to easily and rapidly assess aerobic fitness among long-term (≥3 mos) manual wheelchair users with spinal cord injury. However, aerobic responses to this test have not been established. This study aimed (1) to characterize aerobic responses during the 6-Min Manual Wheelchair Propulsion Test, (2) to establish parallel reliability between the 6-Min Manual Wheelchair Propulsion Test and the Maximal Arm Crank Ergometer Test, and (3) to quantify the strength of association between the total distance traveled during the 6-Min Manual Wheelchair Propulsion Test and peak oxygen consumption. DESIGN: Twenty manual wheelchair users with a spinal cord injury completed both tests. Aerobic parameters were measured before, during, and after the tests. Main outcome measures were peak oxygen consumption and total distance traveled. RESULTS: Progressive cardiorespiratory responses, consistent with guidelines for exercise testing, were observed during both tests. Similar peak oxygen consumption values were obtained during both tests (6-Min Manual Wheelchair Propulsion Test: 20.2 ± 4.9 ml/kg·min; Maximal Arm Crank Ergometer Test: 20.4 ± 5.0 ml/kg·min), were highly correlated (r = 0.92, P < 0.001), and had a good agreement (mean absolute difference = 0.21, 95% confidence interval = -0.70 to 1.11, P = 0.639). The peak oxygen consumption and total distance traveled (mean = 636.6 ± 56.9 m) during the 6-Min Manual Wheelchair Propulsion Test were highly correlated (r = 0.74, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The 6-Min Manual Wheelchair Propulsion Test induces progressive aerobic responses consistent with guidelines for exercise testing and can be used to efficiently estimate aerobic fitness in manual wheelchair users with a spinal cord injury. TO CLAIM CME CREDITS: Complete the self-assessment activity and evaluation online at http://www.physiatry.org/JournalCME CME OBJECTIVES: Upon completion of this article, the reader should be able to: (1) Explain how to administer the Six-Minute Manual Wheelchair Propulsion Test in long-term manual wheelchair users with a spinal cord injury; (2) Contrast how the workload is developed between the Six-Minute Manual Wheelchair Propulsion Test and the Maximal Arm Crank Ergometry Test and recognize how these differences may affect physiological responses; and (3) Explain why caution is advised regarding the use of the Six-Minute Manual Wheelchair Propulsion Test if aiming to estimate aerobic fitness. LEVEL: Advanced ACCREDITATION: The Association of Academic Physiatrists is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians.The Association of Academic Physiatrists designates this Journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1.0 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit(s)™. Physicians should only claim credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».