Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Changes in propulsion technique and shoulder complex loading following low-intensity wheelchair practice in novices
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Changes in propulsion technique and shoulder complex loading following low-intensity wheelchair practice in novices
Do you wish to request the book?
Changes in propulsion technique and shoulder complex loading following low-intensity wheelchair practice in novices
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Changes in propulsion technique and shoulder complex loading following low-intensity wheelchair practice in novices
2018
Overview
Up to 80% of wheelchair users are affected by shoulder pain. The Clinical Practice Guidelines for preservation of upper limb function following spinal cord injury suggest that using a proper wheelchair propulsion technique could minimize the shoulder injury risk. Yet, the exact relationship between the wheelchair propulsion technique and shoulder load is not well understood.
This study aimed to examine the changes in shoulder loading accompanying the typical changes in propulsion technique following 80 min of low-intensity wheelchair practice distributed over 3 weeks.
Seven able-bodied participants performed the pre- and the post-test and 56 min of visual feedback-based low-intensity wheelchair propulsion practice. Kinematics and kinetics of propulsion technique were recorded during the pre- and the post-test. A musculoskeletal model was used to calculate muscle force and glenohumeral reaction force.
Participants decreased push frequency (51→36 pushes/min, p = 0.04) and increased contact angle (68→94°, p = 0.02) between the pre- and the post-test. The excursion of the upper arm increased, approaching significance (297→342 mm, p = 0.06). Range of motion of the hand, trunk and shoulder remained unchanged. The mean glenohumeral reaction force per cycle decreased by 13%, approaching significance (268→232 N, p = 0.06).
Despite homogenous changes in propulsion technique, the kinematic solution to the task varied among the participants. Participants exhibited two glenohumeral reaction force distribution patterns: 1) Two individuals developed high force at the onset of the push, leading to increased peak and mean glenohumeral forces 2) Five individuals distributed the force more evenly over the cycle, lowering both peak and mean glenohumeral forces.
