• J Andrew Taylor, Glen Picard, and Jeffrey J Widrick.
• Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Harvard Medical School, and Cardiovascular Research Laboratory, Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital, 125 Nashua St., Boston, MA 02114, USA. jandrew_taylor@hms.harvard.edu
• PM R. 2011 Sep 1;3(9):817-24.

ObjectiveTo determine the magnitude and range of increases in peak aerobic capacity with hybrid-functional electrical stimulation (FES) rowing versus arms-only rowing in persons with spinal cord injury.DesignComparison of graded exercise tests for peak responses during FES rowing and arms-only rowing. Preliminary data on adaptations to FES row training were gathered in a subset of individuals.SettingOutpatient cardiovascular research laboratory.ParticipantsSix male patients with spinal cord injury (T4-T9, American Spinal Injury Association class A). METHODS OR INTERVENTION: Arms-only rowing was compared with FES rowing, in which the person who is exercising synchronizes the voluntarily controlled upper body movement with the FES-controlled leg movement via stimulation to the paralyzed leg muscles. A subgroup (n = 3) completed at least 6 months of a progressive FES row training exercise program with graded exercise tests every 6 months.Main Outcome MeasurementsPeak oxygen consumption, peak ventilation, peak respiratory exchange ratio, peak heart rate, and peak oxygen pulse.ResultsPeak oxygen consumption was greater during FES rowing than during arms-only rowing (20.0 ± 1.9 mL/kg/min versus 15.7 ± 1.5 mL/kg/min, P = .01). Peak ventilation was similar, whereas peak respiratory exchange ratio and peak heart rate tended to be lower (P = .14 and P = .19, respectively). As a result, oxygen pulse was greater by 35% during FES rowing. Two of the three persons who completed at least 6 months of FES row training demonstrated increases in aerobic capacity greater than those previously observed in able-bodied individuals.ConclusionsFES rowing may provide a more robust exercise stimulus for persons with spinal cord injury than most options currently available because of the greater aerobic demand.Copyright © 2011 American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

18 keywords...

hide…