Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBrurok, Berit
dc.contributor.authorTørhaug, Tom
dc.contributor.authorKarlsen, Trine
dc.contributor.authorLeivseth, Gunnar
dc.contributor.authorHelgerud, Jan
dc.contributor.authorHoff, Jan
dc.date.accessioned2019-10-18T07:34:45Z
dc.date.available2019-10-18T07:34:45Z
dc.date.created2013-01-14T11:32:49Z
dc.date.issued2013
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Rehabilitation Medicine. 2013, 45 (3), 254-259.nb_NO
dc.identifier.issn1650-1977
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11250/2623006
dc.description.abstractObjective: To compare peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak) between: (i) functional electrical stimulation lower extremity pulsed isometric muscle contractions combined with arm cycling (FES iso hybrid), (ii) functional electrical stimulation cycling combined with arm cycling (FES hybrid cycling), and (iii) arm cycling exercise (ACE) in individuals with spinal cord injury with level of injury above and below T6. Design: Cross-over repeated measures design. Methods/participants: Individuals with spinal cord injury (n = 15) with level of injury between C4 and T12, were divided into groups; above (spinal cord injury – high, n = 8) and below (spinal cord injury – low, n = 7) T6 level. On separate days, VO2peak was compared between: (i) ACE, (ii) FES iso hybrid, and (iii) FES hybrid cycling. Results: In the SCI–high group, FES iso hybrid increased VO2peak (17.6 (standard deviation (SD) 5.0) to 23.6 (SD 3.6) ml/kg/min; p = 0.001) and ventilation (50.4 (SD 20.8) to 58.2 (SD 20.7) l/min; p = 0.034) more than ACE. Furthermore, FES hybrid cycling resulted in a 6.8 ml/kg/min higher VO2peak (p = 0.001) and an 11.0 litres/minute (p = 0.001) higher ventilation. ACE peak workload was 10.5 W (p = 0.001) higher during FES hybrid cycling compared with ACE. In the spinal cord injury – low group, no significant differences were found between the modalities. Conclusion: VO2peak increased when ACE was combined with FES iso hybrid or FES hybrid cycling in persons with spinal cord injury above the T6 level. Portable FES may serve as a less resource-demanding alternative to stationary FES cycling, and may have important implications for exercise prescription for spinal cord injury.nb_NO
dc.language.isoengnb_NO
dc.publisherFoundation for Rehabilitation Information -nb_NO
dc.rightsNavngivelse-Ikkekommersiell 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/deed.no*
dc.titleEffect of lower extremity functional electrical stimulation pulsed isometric contractions on arm cycling peak oxygen uptake in spinal cord injured individualsnb_NO
dc.typeJournal articlenb_NO
dc.typePeer reviewednb_NO
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionnb_NO
dc.source.pagenumber254-259nb_NO
dc.source.volume45nb_NO
dc.source.journalJournal of Rehabilitation Medicinenb_NO
dc.source.issue3nb_NO
dc.identifier.doi10.2340/16501977-1098
dc.identifier.cristin987330
dc.description.localcode© 2013 The Authors. Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Licence 4.0 Internationalnb_NO
cristin.unitcode1920,5,0,0
cristin.unitcode194,65,25,0
cristin.unitcode194,65,30,0
cristin.unitnameKlinikk for fysikalsk medisin og rehabilitering
cristin.unitnameInstitutt for sirkulasjon og bildediagnostikk
cristin.unitnameInstitutt for nevromedisin og bevegelsesvitenskap
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Navngivelse-Ikkekommersiell 4.0 Internasjonal
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Navngivelse-Ikkekommersiell 4.0 Internasjonal