Effects of single-variable biofeedback on wheelchair handrim biomechanics.

OBJECTIVE To determine the effects of single-variable biofeedback on select wheelchair propulsion variables. DESIGN Within-subject comparisons. SETTING Biomechanics laboratory. PARTICIPANTS Manual wheelchair users (N=31). INTERVENTIONS Biofeedback on braking moment, cadence, contact angle, peak force, push distance, and smoothness were presented on a large monitor during propulsion on a motor-driven treadmill. For each variable, subjects were asked to make a maximum improvement, as well as a targeted 10% improvement for cadence, contact angle, peak force, and push distance. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Relative differences (%) in each variable between the normal propulsion trial and the biofeedback trials. RESULTS Subjects were able to interpret and respond to the biofeedback successfully. For the maximum change conditions, significant improvements were made to all variables except smoothness, with individual improvements of 11% in peak force, 31% in contact angle, 44% in braking moment, 64% in cadence, and 255% in push distance. For the 10% target conditions, improvements were achieved to within 1% for all variables except peak force, which was a difficult variable for most subjects to control. Cross-variable interactions were found for most variables, particularly during the maximum change conditions. Minimizing cadence led to a 154% increase in peak force, suggesting the need for multi-variable feedback if multiple training objectives, such as reducing cadence and peak force simultaneously, are desired. While subjects were unable to significantly change smoothness, efforts to push more smoothly led to improvements across most outcome variables. CONCLUSIONS Biofeedback can be used to improve specific aspects of wheelchair propulsion. Cadence, contact angle, and push distance are well controlled by wheelchair users, and may be useful for clinical propulsion training. Clinicians should be aware of and comfortable with any cross-variable effects resulting from single-variable biofeedback training.

[1]  Alicia M Koontz,et al.  Relation between median and ulnar nerve function and wrist kinematics during wheelchair propulsion. , 2004, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[2]  Ian Rice,et al.  Hand Rim Wheelchair Propulsion Training Using Biomechanical Real-Time Visual Feedback Based on Motor Learning Theory Principles , 2010, The journal of spinal cord medicine.

[3]  J. Jobin,et al.  Physiological responses to maximal exercise on arm cranking and wheelchair ergometer with paraplegics , 1991, Paraplegia.

[4]  R. Waters,et al.  Preservation of Upper Limb Function Following Spinal Cord Injury: A Clinical Practice Guideline for Health-Care Professionals , 2005, The journal of spinal cord medicine.

[5]  M. Boninger,et al.  Shoulder joint kinetics and pathology in manual wheelchair users. , 2006, Clinical biomechanics.

[6]  Neil E. Fowler,et al.  Erratum: Effects of 4-weeks of asynchronous hand-rim wheelchair practice on mechanical efficiency and timing (vol 32, pg 2155, 2010) , 2011 .

[7]  M M Rodgers,et al.  Influence of training on biomechanics of wheelchair propulsion. , 2001, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[8]  H E J Veeger,et al.  Consequence of feedback-based learning of an effective hand rim wheelchair force production on mechanical efficiency. , 2002, Clinical biomechanics.

[9]  J. Collinger,et al.  Ultrasonographic median nerve changes after a wheelchair sporting event. , 2009, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[10]  L. V. D. van der Woude,et al.  Mechanical load on the upper extremity during wheelchair activities. , 2005, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[11]  Alicia M Koontz,et al.  Shoulder magnetic resonance imaging abnormalities, wheelchair propulsion, and gender. , 2003, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[12]  Margaret A. Finley,et al.  The biomechanics of wheelchair propulsion in individuals with and without upper-limb impairment. , 2004, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[13]  Kenton R Kaufman,et al.  The effect of visual biofeedback on the propulsion effectiveness of experienced wheelchair users. , 2006, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[14]  H E J Veeger,et al.  Adaptations in Physiology and Propulsion Techniques During the Initial Phase of Learning Manual Wheelchair Propulsion , 2003, American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation.

[15]  Lucas H V van der Woude,et al.  Physical capacity after 7 weeks of low-intensity wheelchair training , 2010, Disability and rehabilitation.

[16]  Michael L Boninger,et al.  Redefining the manual wheelchair stroke cycle: identification and impact of nonpropulsive pushrim contact. , 2009, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[17]  L H V van der Woude,et al.  Mechanical efficiency and propulsion technique after 7 weeks of low-intensity wheelchair training. , 2008, Clinical biomechanics.

[18]  R. Waters,et al.  Upper extremity pain in the postrehabilitation spinal cord injured patient. , 1992, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[19]  Kerri A Morgan,et al.  The influence of verbal training and visual feedback on manual wheelchair propulsion , 2009, Disability and rehabilitation. Assistive technology.