Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27144169›Full record

Trial reportBioMed research international2016

Arm Crank and Wheelchair Ergometry Produce Similar Peak Oxygen Uptake but Different Work Economy Values in Individuals with Spinal Cord Injury.

Tom Tørhaug, Berit Brurok, Jan Hoff, Jan Helgerud, Gunnar Leivseth

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readClinical Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BioMed research international, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00987155 (Spinal Cord Injury), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT00987155 nacompletednot on this map

Spinal Cord Injury: Endurance, Strength and Cardiac Function Induced by Efficient Training Protocols

TypeinterventionalSponsorNorwegian University of Science and TechnologyRan2007 to 2012Enrolled12ConditionsCardiovascular DiseaseArmsErgometry
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Aquatic, deep water peak VOThe journal of spinal cord medicine · 2019
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Tom TørhaugSt. Olav's University Hospital, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Spinal Cord Injury Unit, 7006 Trondheim, Norway; Faculty of Medicine, Department of Neuroscience, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 7491 Trondheim, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-3503-0619
Berit BrurokSt. Olav's University Hospital, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Spinal Cord Injury Unit, 7006 Trondheim, Norway; Faculty of Medicine, Department of Circulation and Imaging, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 7491 Trondheim, Norway.ORCID 0000-0003-3193-7405
Jan HoffSt. Olav's University Hospital, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Spinal Cord Injury Unit, 7006 Trondheim, Norway; Faculty of Medicine, Department of Circulation and Imaging, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 7491 Trondheim, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-8432-7304
Jan HelgerudFaculty of Medicine, Department of Circulation and Imaging, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 7491 Trondheim, Norway; Hokksund Medical Rehabilitation Centre, 3300 Hokksund, Norway; Department of Sports and Outdoor Life Studies, Telemark University College, 3800 Bø, Norway.
Gunnar LeivsethSt. Olav's University Hospital, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Spinal Cord Injury Unit, 7006 Trondheim, Norway; Faculty of Medicine, Department of Neuroscience, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 7491 Trondheim, Norway; Institute of Clinical Medicine, Neuromuscular Disorders Research Group, The Arctic University of Norway UiT, 9019 Tromsø, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-8626-4562
Norwegian University of Science and Technology · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective. To study whether values for peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak) and work economy (WE) at a standardized workload are different when tested by arm crank ergometry (ACE) and wheelchair ergometry (WCE). Methods. Twelve paraplegic men with spinal cord injury (SCI) in stable neurological condition participated in this cross-sectional repeated-measures study. We determined VO2peak and peak power output (POpeak) values during ACE and WCE in a work-matched protocol. Work economy was tested at a standardized workload of 30 Watts (W) for both ACE and WCE. Results. There were no significant differences in VO2peak (mL·kg(-1)·min(-1)) between ACE (27.3 ± 3.2) and WCE (27.4 ± 3.8) trials, and a Bland-Altman plot shows that findings are within 95% level of agreement. WE or oxygen consumption at 30 W (VO2-30W) was significantly lower during WCE compared to ACE (P < 0.039). Mean (95% CI) POpeak (W) were 130 (111-138) and 100 (83-110) during ACE and WCE, respectively. Conclusion. The findings in the present study support the use of both ACE and WCE for testing peak oxygen uptake. However, WE differed between the two test modalities, meaning that less total energy is used to perform external work of 30 W during wheelchair exercise when using this WCE (VP100 Handisport ergometer). Clinical Trials Protocol Record is NCT00987155/4.2007.2271.

Indexed as

AdultArmCross-Sectional StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedOxygenOxygen ConsumptionPsychomotor PerformanceSpinal Cord InjuriesWheelchairsOxygen

Identifiers

PMID27144169
PMCPMC4842047
OpenAlexW2329118117

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.