Exercise, Rehabilitation, Spinal Cord Injuries
Conditions
Keywords
Inpatient Rehabilitation, Sprint interval training, Exercise, Spinal Cord Injury
Brief summary
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.
Interventions
Participants utilized the arm ergometer for improving aerobic exercise capacity
OTHERmoderate intensity continuous training
Participants utilized the arm ergometer for improving aerobic exercise capacity
Sponsors
Hamilton Health Sciences Corporation
McMaster University
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
SUPPORTIVE_CARE
Masking
NONE
Intervention model description
Participants were randomized to one of two groups: (A) sprint interval training (SIT) or (B) moderate intensity continuous training (MICT).
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 65 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Participants with sub-acute spinal cord injury (time since injury: 14 - 182 days) * Undergoing inpatient rehabilitation * Aged 18-65 years * Injury level at the second cervical vertebrae (C2) or below
Exclusion criteria
\- Unable to perform arm-ergometry training
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Change in peak power output | Change in peak power output from baseline to 5 weeks | maximum amount of power produced during a graded exercise test on the arm-ergometer |
| Change in sub-maximal arm-ergometry | Change in sub-maximal arm-ergometry from baseline to 5 weeks | 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. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Change in self-efficacy for exercise | Change in self-efficacy from baseline to 5 weeks | Using a self-reported questionnaire, participants rated how confident they are with regards to performing and carrying out regular physical activities and exercises. |
| Cardiovascular Responses | Throughout each week of training (Week 1,Week 2, Week 3, Week4, Week 5) | Monitored heart rate throughout each training session |
| Pain perceptions | Measured only at the end of the intervention (5 weeks) | 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. |
| Exercise Satisfaction | Measured only at the end of the intervention (5 weeks) | Participants completed the Physical Activity Enjoyment Scale (PACES) in order to asses the level of enjoyment with the training intervention they received. |
| Perceptual Responses | Throughout each week of training (Week 1,Week 2, Week 3, Week4, Week 5) | Monitored ratings of perceived exertion throughout each training session |
Countries
Canada
Outcome results
None listed