Immediately following a spinal cord injury (SCI), patients are admitted to inpatient rehabilitation where they undergo physical reconditioning in preparation for a return to home setting. The current standard of practice for aerobic training is performing arm-ergometry for 25 mins at a frequency of three times per week. Given the move towards shortened length of stay during inpatient rehabilitation, performing MICT can consume a considerable amount of therapy time. Sprint interval training (SIT) has been shown to elicit similar improvements in physical capacity, despite a reduced time commitment to MICT. However, there are no controlled trials comparing the effects of SIT to MICT in individuals with SCI undergoing inpatient rehabilitation. The primary aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of a five-week, thrice weekly 10 min SIT program and compare outcome measures to a traditional 25 minute MICT program on the arm-ergometer in individuals with SCI undergoing inpatient clinical rehabilitation. It was hypothesized that five weeks of SIT and MICT would induce similar changes in maximal and sub-maximal exercise performance, self-efficacy for exercise, and exercise enjoyment, despite large differences in training volume and time commitment. It was also hypothesized that SIT would be well tolerated and elicit higher levels of cardiovascular strain than MICT.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
SUPPORTIVE_CARE
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
20
Participants utilized the arm ergometer for improving aerobic exercise capacity
Participants utilized the arm ergometer for improving aerobic exercise capacity
McMaster University
Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Change in peak power output
maximum amount of power produced during a graded exercise test on the arm-ergometer
Time frame: Change in peak power output from baseline to 5 weeks
Change in sub-maximal arm-ergometry
Participants performed three 5-minute steady state workloads on the arm-ergometer at power outputs corresponding to RPE's of 8, 10 and 12. Participants were given a minimum of 2 minutes, and a maximum of 5 minutes of rest in between each workload.
Time frame: Change in sub-maximal arm-ergometry from baseline to 5 weeks
Cardiovascular Responses
Monitored heart rate throughout each training session
Time frame: Throughout each week of training (Week 1,Week 2, Week 3, Week4, Week 5)
Perceptual Responses
Monitored ratings of perceived exertion throughout each training session
Time frame: Throughout each week of training (Week 1,Week 2, Week 3, Week4, Week 5)
Change in self-efficacy for exercise
Using a self-reported questionnaire, participants rated how confident they are with regards to performing and carrying out regular physical activities and exercises.
Time frame: Change in self-efficacy from baseline to 5 weeks
Exercise Satisfaction
Participants completed the Physical Activity Enjoyment Scale (PACES) in order to asses the level of enjoyment with the training intervention they received.
Time frame: Measured only at the end of the intervention (5 weeks)
Pain perceptions
Through a questionnaire, participants rated how much shoulder pain, bodily pain, and physical discomfort they typically experience throughout the day and how much pain they experienced with the intervention they were allocated to.
Time frame: Measured only at the end of the intervention (5 weeks)
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.