Investigating the Effects of a High-Load Resistance Training Program on Bone Health in Wheelchair Users (the BoneWheel Study): Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Low mechanical loading of the bones of wheelchair users leads to low bone mineral density (BMD) and increased risk of bone fractures and associated complications. High-load resistance training of the upper body is one way to achieve mechanical loading of the lumbar spine and the hip bones. In addition, maintaining good nutritional status with key nutrients for bone remodeling, that is, vitamin D and calcium, is important for bone accrual. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to investigate the effect of 24 weeks of high-load resistance training combined with nutritional optimization on lumbar spine BMD. Secondary objectives are to investigate the effects of the intervention on (1) bone and physical health parameters, such as bone turnover blood markers, nutritional status, body composition, and maximal muscular strength, as well as (2) exercise motivation and mental health. METHODS: In this randomized controlled trial, we aimed to include 60 wheelchair users with nonprogressive impairments. Participants were randomly allocated to 24 weeks of either (1) high-load resistance training and nutrition optimization or (2) nutrition optimization only, stratified by sex and sport activity status. The training program consisted of 3 weekly sessions comprising 6 exercises periodized in low-, moderate-, and high-load phases. The nutritional optimization aimed to ensure sufficient intake of protein, vitamin D, and calcium. BMD and body composition; maximal muscular strength; and nutritional, physical, and mental health status were assessed at baseline, midpoint, and postintervention visits. Furthermore, follow-up assessments of a subgroup were conducted at 6 to 18 months after the intervention. This protocol was approved by the Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics South-East, Norway. RESULTS: Recruitment occurred between November 2022 and 2023. A total of 68 wheelchair users were screened for eligibility, of whom 45 (66%) were enrolled and allocated to one of the study groups (n=24, 53% training group; n=21, 47% control group). At the midpoint and postintervention visits, 36 (n=17, 47% and n=19, 53%, respectively) and 33 (n=14, 42% and n=19, 58%, respectively) participants were assessed, respectively. Analysis of the data collected at the screening visit commenced in spring 2024, while analyses of data collected at the baseline and retest visits began in autumn 2024. Publication of the results of this study is expected by the end of 2025. CONCLUSIONS: This protocol presents the first randomized controlled trial of a high-load resistance training intervention in wheelchair users, focusing on bone, physical, and mental health. The results will contribute to new knowledge in exercise science for this population and generate novel hypotheses for future studies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.032 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.018 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.049 | 0.008 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".