Leg joint power output during progressive resistance FES-LCE cycling in SCI subjects: developing an index of fatigue.
BACKGROUND
The purpose of this study was to investigate the biomechanics of the hip, knee and ankle during a progressive resistance cycling protocol in an effort to detect and measure the presence of muscle fatigue. It was hypothesized that knee power output can be used as an indicator of fatigue in order to assess the cycling performance of SCI subjects.


METHODS
Six spinal cord injured subjects (2 incomplete, 4 complete) between the ages of twenty and fifty years old and possessing either a complete or incomplete spinal cord injury at or below the fourth cervical vertebra participated in this study. Kinematic data and pedal forces were recorded during cycling at increasing levels of resistance. Ankle, knee and hip power outputs and resultant pedal force were calculated. Ergometer cadence and muscle stimulation intensity were also recorded.


RESULTS
The main findings of this study were: (a) ankle and knee power outputs decreased, whereas hip power output increased with increasing resistance, (b) cadence, stimulation intensity and resultant pedal force in that combined order were significant predictors of knee power output and (c) knowing the value of these combined predictors at 10 rpm, an index of fatigue can be developed, quantitatively expressing the power capacity of the knee joint with respect to a baseline power level defined as fatigue.


CONCLUSIONS
An index of fatigue was successfully developed, proportionalizing knee power capacity during cycling to a predetermined value of fatigue. The fatigue index value at 0/8th kp, measured 90 seconds into active, unassisted pedaling was 1.6. This indicates initial power capacity at the knee to be 1.6 times greater than fatigue. The fatigue index decreased to 1.1 at 2/8th kp, representing approximately a 30% decrease in the knee's power capacity within a 4 minute timespan. These findings suggest that the present cycling protocol is not sufficient for a rider to gain the benefits of FES and thus raises speculation as to whether or not progressive resistance cycling is an appropriate protocol for SCI subjects.
Haapala
Stephenie A
SA
Functional Performance Laboratory, Department of Allied Health Sciences, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT, USA. sahaapala@gmail.com
Faghri
Pouran D
PD
Adams
Douglas J
DJ
D000328:Adult; D003198:Computer Simulation; D003936:Diagnosis, Computer-Assisted / Q000379:methods; D004599:Electric Stimulation Therapy / Q000379:methods*; D004735:Energy Transfer; D005080:Exercise Test / Q000379:methods*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007866:Leg / Q000503:physiopathology*; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D008954:Models, Biological; D018763:Muscle Fatigue; D005082:Physical Exertion; D013119:Spinal Cord Injuries / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000503:physiopathology* / Q000534:rehabilitation*; D013647:Task Performance and Analysis; D013813:Therapy, Computer-Assisted / Q000379:methods; D016896:Treatment Outcome