VO2peak and Exercise Efficiency in Upper-body Poling

Comparison of Peak Oxygen Uptake and Exercise Efficiency Between Upper-body Poling and Arm Crank Ergometry in Trained Paraplegic and Able-bodied Participants

This study compares peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak) and exercise efficiency in upper-body poling versus arm crank ergometry in trained able-bodied and paraplegic participants.

Study Overview

• Status: Completed
• Conditions: Spinal Cord Injuries
• Intervention / Treatment: Diagnostic test: upper-body double-poling; Diagnostic test: arm crank ergometry

Detailed Description

Peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak) and exercise efficiency are key factors for endurance performance. In persons who are primarily able to use their upper-body during exercise, such as many Paralympic athletes, the mode most commonly used in assessing VO2peak and efficiency is arm crank ergometry (ACE). However, sport-specificity of the test mode has been suggested to be of importance for achieving VO2peak and exercise efficiency that are reflective of the aerobic capacity in the respective sport. For ice sledge hockey players, cross-country sit skiers and sitting biathletes, upper-body poling (UP) is the most sport-specific test mode. However, it has not yet been investigated whether VO2peak and efficiency differ between ACE and UP. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare VO2peak and exercise efficiency in upper-body poling versus arm crank ergometry in trained able-bodied and paraplegic participants. Participants performed four 5-min submaximal stages at increasing effort and an incremental peak test to exhaustion in both ACE and UP.

• Study Type: Interventional
• Enrollment (Actual): 18
• Phase: Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

Study Locations

• Norway
  • Trondheim, Norway
    • Centre for Elite Sports Research

Participation Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: 18 years to 50 years (ADULT)
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: No
• Genders Eligible for Study: All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

• participants between the age of 18 and 50
• well upper-body-trained participants with or without paraplegia

Exclusion Criteria:

• people with injuries or sicknesses that might have impacted the testing

Study Plan

How is the study designed?

Design Details

• Primary Purpose: DIAGNOSTIC
• Allocation: NON_RANDOMIZED
• Interventional Model: PARALLEL
• Masking: NONE

Number of Arms

2

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm	Intervention / Treatment
OTHER: paraplegic; Well-trained participants with a spinal cord injury (<Th1) were included in this group.	Diagnostic test: upper-body double-poling; An incremental peak test to exhaustion and four 5-min submaximal stages were performed in the upper-body double-poling mode.; Diagnostic test: arm crank ergometry; An incremental peak test to exhaustion and four 5-min submaximal stages were performed in the arm crank ergometry mode.
OTHER: able bodied; Upper-body trained, able-bodied participants were included in this group.	Diagnostic test: upper-body double-poling; An incremental peak test to exhaustion and four 5-min submaximal stages were performed in the upper-body double-poling mode.; Diagnostic test: arm crank ergometry; An incremental peak test to exhaustion and four 5-min submaximal stages were performed in the arm crank ergometry mode.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Peak oxygen uptake	Peak oxygen uptake was measured during an incremental test to exhaustion.	3 weeks

Collaborators and Investigators

• Sponsor: Norwegian University of Science and Technology
• Collaborators: St. Olavs Hospital
• Investigators: Study Director: Jorunn Helbostad, phd prof, Dept of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology

Study record dates

Study Major Dates

• Study Start (ACTUAL): September 1, 2016
• Primary Completion (ACTUAL): May 1, 2017
• Study Completion (ACTUAL): May 1, 2017

Study Registration Dates

• First Submitted: September 13, 2017
• First Submitted That Met QC Criteria: September 13, 2017
• First Posted (ACTUAL): September 15, 2017

Study Record Updates

• Last Update Posted (ACTUAL): September 15, 2017
• Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria: September 13, 2017
• Last Verified: September 1, 2017

More Information

Terms related to this study

• Keywords: Oxygen consumption; Physical endurance
• Additional Relevant MeSH Terms: Central Nervous System Diseases; Nervous System Diseases; Wounds and Injuries; Trauma, Nervous System; Spinal Cord Diseases; Spinal Cord Injuries
• Other Study ID Numbers: 2015/2008

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

• Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?: YES
• IPD Plan Description: All data will be de-identified by the project coordinator. The de-identified data will be stored on the NTNU server in a folder that only the JKB and ØS have access to. For analysing the data, parts of the de-identified data might be distributed amongst the four researchers and two master students linked to this study.
• IPD Sharing Time Frame: September 2016-May 2017
• IPD Sharing Supporting Information Type: STUDY_PROTOCOL; SAP; ICF

Drug and device information, study documents

• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product: No
• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product: No