Are the force characteristics of synchronous handcycling affected by speed and the method to impose power?

A novel push-pull central-lever mechanism reduces peak forces and energy-cost compared to hand-rim wheelchair propulsion during a controlled lab-based experiment

Background

Hand-rim wheelchair propulsion is straining and mechanically inefficient, often leading to upper limb complaints. Previous push–pull lever propulsion mechanisms have shown to perform better or equal in efficiency and physiological strain. Propulsion biomechanics have not been evaluated thus far. A novel push–pull central-lever propulsion mechanism is compared to conventional hand-rim wheelchair propulsion, using both physiological and biomechanical outcomes under low-intensity steady-state conditions on a motor driven treadmill.

Methods

In this 5 day (distributed over a maximum of 21 days) between-group experiment, 30 able-bodied novices performed 60 min (5 × 3 × 4 min) of practice in either the push–pull central lever wheelchair (n = 15) or the hand-rim wheelchair (n = 15). At the first and final sessions cardiopulmonary strain, propulsion kinematics and force production were determined in both instrumented propulsion mechanisms. Repeated measures ANOVA evaluated between (propulsion mechanism type), within (over practice) and interaction effects.

Results

Over practice, both groups significantly improved on all outcome measures. After practice the peak forces during the push and pull phase of lever propulsion were considerably lower compared to those in the handrim push phase (42 ± 10 & 46 ± 10 vs 63 ± 21N). Concomitantly, energy expenditure was found to be lower as well (263 ± 45 vs 298 ± 59W), on the other hand gross mechanical efficiency (6.4 ± 1.5 vs 5.9 ± 1.3%), heart-rate (97 ± 10 vs 98 ± 10 bpm) and perceived exertion (9 ± 2 vs 10 ± 1) were not significantly different between modes.

Conclusion

The current study shows the potential benefits of the newly designed push–pull central-lever propulsion mechanism over regular hand rim wheelchair propulsion. The much lower forces and energy expenditure might help to reduce the strain on the upper extremities and thus prevent the development of overuse injury. This proof of concept in a controlled laboratory experiment warrants continued experimental research in wheelchair-users during daily life.

Steering Does Affect Biophysical Responses in Asynchronous, but Not Synchronous Submaximal Handcycle Ergometry in Able-Bodied Men

Real-life daily handcycling requires combined propulsion and steering to control the front wheel. Today, the handcycle cranks are mostly mounted synchronously unlike the early handcycle generations. Alternatively, arm cycle ergometers do not require steering and the cranks are mostly positioned asynchronously. The current study aims to evaluate the effects of combining propulsion and steering requirements on synchronous and asynchronous submaximal handcycle ergometry. We hypothesize that asynchronous handcycling with steering results in the mechanically least efficient condition, due to compensation for unwanted rotations that are not seen in synchronous handcycling, regardless of steering. Sixteen able-bodied male novices volunteered in this lab-based experiment. The set-up consisted of a handcycle ergometer with 3D force sensors at each crank that also allows “natural” steering. Four submaximal steady-state (60 rpm, ~35 W) exercise conditions were presented in a counterbalanced order: synchronous with a fixed steering axis, synchronous with steering, asynchronous with a fixed axis and asynchronous with steering. All participants practiced 3 × 4 mins with 30 mins rest in between every condition. Finally, they did handcycle for 4 mins in each of the four conditions, interspaced with 10 mins rest, while metabolic outcomes, kinetics and kinematics of the ergometer were recorded. The additional steering component did not influence velocity, torque and power production during synchronous handcycling and therefore resulted in an equal metabolically efficient handcycling configuration compared to the fixed condition. Contrarily, asynchronous handcycling with steering requirements showed a reduced mechanical efficiency, as velocity around the steering axis increased and torque and power production were less effective. Based on the torque production around the crank and steering axes, neuromuscular compensation strategies seem necessary to prevent steering movements in the asynchronous mode. To practice or test real-life daily synchronous handcycling, a synchronous crank set-up of the ergometer is advised, as exercise performance in terms of mechanical efficiency, metabolic strain, and torque production is independent of steering requirements in that mode. Asynchronous handcycling or arm ergometry demands a different handcycle technique in terms of torque production and results in higher metabolic responses than synchronous handcycling, making it unsuitable for testing.

Biomechanical and physiological differences between synchronous and asynchronous low intensity handcycling during practice-based learning in able-bodied men

BACKGROUND

Originally, the cranks of a handcycle were mounted with a 180° phase shift (asynchronous). However, as handcycling became more popular, the crank mode switched to a parallel mounting (synchronous) over the years. Differences between both modes have been investigated, however, not into great detail for propulsion technique or practice effects. Our aim is to compare both crank modes from a biomechanical and physiological perspective, hence considering force and power production as a cause of physiological outcome measures. This is done within a practice protocol, as it is expected that motor learning takes place in the early stages of handcycling in novices.

METHODS

Twelve able-bodied male novices volunteered to take part. The experiment consisted of a pre-test, three practice sessions and a post-test, which was subsequently repeated for both crank modes in a counterbalanced manner. In each session the participants handcycled for 3 × 4 minutes on a leveled motorized treadmill at 1.94 m/s. Inbetween sessions were 2 days of rest. 3D forces, handlebar and crank angle were measured on the left hand side. Kinematic markers were placed on the handcycle to monitor the movement on the treadmill. Lastly, breath-by-breath spirometry combined with heart-rate were continuously measured. The effects of crank mode and practice-based learning were analyzed using a two way repeated measures ANOVA, with synchronous vs asynchronous and pre-test vs post-test as within-subject factors.

RESULTS

In the pre-test, asynchronous handcycling was less efficient than synchronous handcycling in terms of physiological strain, force production and timing. At the post-test, the metabolic costs were comparable for both modes. The force production was, also after practice, more efficient in the synchronous mode. External power production, crank rotation velocity and the distance travelled back and forwards on the treadmill suggest that asynchronous handcycling is more constant throughout the cycle.

CONCLUSIONS

As the metabolic costs were reduced in the asynchronous mode, we would advise to include a practice period, when comparing both modes in scientific experiments. For handcycle users, we would currently advise a synchronous set-up for daily use, as the force production is more effective in the synchronous mode, even after practice.

Shoulder and thorax kinematics contribute to increased power output of competitive handcyclists

Current knowledge of recumbent handbike configuration and handcycling technique is limited. The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the upper limb kinematics and handbike configurations of recreational and competitive recumbent handcyclists, during sport‐specific intensities. Thirteen handcyclists were divided into two significantly different groups based on peak aerobic power output (PO_peak) and race experience; competitive (n = 7; 5 H3 and 2 H4 classes; PO_peak: 247 ± 20 W) and recreational (n = 6; 4 H3 and 2 H4 classes; PO_peak: 198 ± 21 W). Participants performed bouts of exercise at training (50% PO_peak), competition (70% PO_peak), and sprint intensity while three‐dimensional kinematic data (thorax, scapula, shoulder, elbow, and wrist) were collected. Statistical parametric mapping was used to compare the kinematics of competitive and recreational handcyclists. Handbike configurations were determined from additional markers on the handbike. Competitive handcyclists flexed their thorax (~5°, P < 0.05), extended their shoulder (~10°, P < 0.01), and posteriorly tilted their scapular (~15°, P < 0.05) more than recreational handcyclists. Differences in scapular motion occurred only at training intensity while differences in shoulder extension and thorax flexion occurred both at training and competition intensities. No differences were observed during sprinting. No significant differences in handbike configuration were identified. This study is the first to compare the upper limb kinematics of competitive recreational handcyclists at sport‐specific intensities. Competitive handcyclists employed significantly different propulsion strategies at training and competition intensities. Since no differences in handbike configuration were identified, these kinematic differences could be due to technical training adaptations potentially optimizing muscle recruitment or force generation of the arm.

Development and Testing of a Novel Arm Cranking-Powered Watercraft

There is a lack of human-powered watercrafts for people with lower-body disabilities. The purpose of this study was therefore to develop a watercraft for disabled people and investigate the metabolic cost and efficiency when pedaling. The watercraft was designed by combining parts of a waterbike and a handbike. Nine able-bodied subjects pedaled the watercraft at different speeds on a lake to provide steady-state metabolic measurements, and a deceleration test was performed to measure the hydrodynamic resistance of the watercraft. The results showed a linear correlation between metabolic power and mechanical power (r² = 0.93). Metabolic expenditure when pedaling the watercraft was similar to other physical activities performed by people with lower-body disabilities. Moreover, the efficiency of the watercraft showed to be comparable to other human-powered watercraft and could, as a result, be an alternative fitness tool especially for people with lower-body disabilities, who seek water activities. A number of suggestions are proposed however, to improve the efficiency and ergonomics of the watercraft.

A New Postural Force Production Index to Assess Propulsion Effectiveness During Handcycling

The aim of this study was to propose a new index called Postural Force Production Index (PFPI) for evaluating the force production during handcycling. For a given posture, it assesses the force generation capacity in all Cartesian directions by linking the joint configuration to the effective force applied on the handgrips. Its purpose is to give insight into the force pattern of handcycling users, and could be used as ergonomic index. The PFPI is based on the force ellipsoid, which belongs to the class of manipulability indices and represents the overall force production capabilities at the hand in all Cartesian directions from unit joint torques. The kinematics and kinetics of the arm were recorded during a 1-min exercise test on a handcycle at 70 revolutions per minute performed by one paraplegic expert in handcycling. The PFPI values were compared with the Fraction Effective Force (FEF), which is classically associated with the effectiveness of force application. The results showed a correspondence in the propulsion cycle between FEF peaks and the most favorable postures to produce a force tangential to the crank rotation (PFPI). This preliminary study opens a promising way to study patterns of force production in the framework of handcycling movement analysis.

Force Application During Handcycling and Handrim Wheelchair Propulsion: An Initial Comparison

The aim of the study was to evaluate the external applied forces, the effectiveness of force application and the net shoulder moments of handcycling in comparison with handrim wheelchair propulsion at different inclines. Ten able-bodied men performed standardized exercises on a treadmill at inclines of 1%, 2.5% and 4% with an instrumented handbike and wheelchair that measured three-dimensional propulsion forces. The results showed that during handcycling significantly lower mean forces were applied at inclines of 2.5% (P< .001) and 4% (P< .001) and significantly lower peak forces were applied at all inclines (1%:P= .014, 2.5% and 4%:P< .001). At the 2.5% incline, where power output was the same for both devices, total forces (mean over trial) of 22.8 N and 27.5 N and peak forces of 40.1 N and 106.9 N were measured for handbike and wheelchair propulsion. The force effectiveness did not differ between the devices (P= .757); however, the effectiveness did increase with higher inclines during handcycling whereas it stayed constant over all inclines for wheelchair propulsion. The resulting peak net shoulder moments were lower for handcycling compared with wheelchair propulsion at all inclines (P< .001). These results confirm the assumption that handcycling is physically less straining.

The influence of simulated rotator cuff tears on the risk for impingement in handbike and handrim wheelchair propulsion

BACKGROUND

Rotator cuff tears strongly affect the biomechanics of the shoulder joint in their role to regulate the joint contact force needed to prevent the joint from dislocation. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of simulated progressed rotator cuff tears on the (in)stability of the glenohumeral joint and the risk for impingement during wheelchair and handbike propulsion.

METHODS

The Delft Shoulder and Elbow Model was used to calculate the magnitude of the glenohumeral joint reaction force and the objective function J, which is an indication of the effort needed to complete the task. Full-thickness tears were simulated by virtually removing muscles from the model.

FINDINGS

With larger cuff tears the joint reaction force was higher and more superiorly directed. Also extra muscle force was necessary to balance the external force such that the glenohumeral joint did not dislocate.

INTERPRETATION

A tear of only the supraspinatus leads only to a minor increase in muscle forces and a minor shift of the force on the glenoid, indicating that it is possible to function well with a torn supraspinatus muscle. A massive tear shifts the direction of the joint reaction force to the superior border of the glenoid, increasing the risk for impingement.

Shoulder load during handcycling at different incline and speed conditions

BACKGROUND

The manual wheelchair user population experiences a high prevalence of upper-limb injuries, which are related to a high load on the shoulder joint during activities of daily living, such as handrim wheelchair propulsion. An alternative mode of propulsion is handcycling, where lower external forces are suggested to be applied to reach the same power output as in handrim wheelchair propulsion. This study aimed to quantify glenohumeral contact forces and muscle forces during handcycling and compare them to previous results of handrim wheelchair propulsion.

METHODS

Ten able-bodied men propelled the handbike on a treadmill at two inclines (1% and 4% with a velocity of 1.66 m/s) and two speed conditions (1.39 and 1.94 m/s with fixed power output). Three-dimensional kinematics and kinetics were obtained and used as input for a musculoskeletal model of the arm and shoulder. Output variables were glenohumeral contact forces and forces of important shoulder muscles.

FINDINGS

The highest mean and peak glenohumeral contact forces occurred at 4% incline (420 N, 890 N respectively). The scapular part of the deltoideus, the triceps and the trapezius produced the highest force.

INTERPRETATION

Due to the circular movement and the continuous force application during handcycling, the glenohumeral contact forces, as well as the muscle forces were clearly lower compared to the results in the existing literature on wheelchair propulsion. These findings prove the assumption that handcycling is mechanically less straining than handrim wheelchair propulsion, which may help preventing overuse to the shoulder complex.