4.2 Article

Single Limb Exercise: Pilot Study of Physiological and Functional Responses to Forced Use of the Hemiparetic Lower Extremity

期刊

TOPICS IN STROKE REHABILITATION
卷 17, 期 2, 页码 128-139

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1310/tsr1702-128

关键词

exercise; hemiparesis; oxygen consumption; stroke

资金

  1. National Institute of Disability and Rehabilitation Research [H133F050006]
  2. University of Kansas Medical Center General Clinical Research Center (GCRC), NCRR/NIH [M01 RR 023940]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: Stroke-related deficits can impede both functional performance and walking tolerance. Individuals with hemiparesis rely on the stronger limb during exercise and functional tasks. The single limb exercise (SLE) intervention was a unique training protocol that focused only on the hemiparetic limb. Our objective was to determine the effect of the SLE intervention on cardiorespiratory fitness parameters. Methods: Twelve participants (5 male) with a mean age of 60.6 +/- 14.5 years and 69.1 +/- 82.2 months post stroke participated in the training intervention. All participants performed SLE using the hemiparetic leg three times a week for 4 weeks. The nonhemiparetic limb served as the control limb and did not engage in SLE. Peak oxygen uptake (VO2 peak) and oxygen uptake (VO2) were measured at baseline and post intervention in all 12 participants. At pre and post intervention, gait velocity was assessed in a subset of participants (n=7) using the 10-m fast-walk test. Results: After the 4-week SLE training intervention, significant improvements were found for VO2 during submaximal work effort (P=.009) and gait velocity (n=7) (P=.001). Peak oxygen uptake did not increase (P=.41) after the training intervention. Conclusion: These data suggest that SLE training was an effective method for improving oxygen uptake and reducing energy expenditure during submaximal effort. Unilateral exercise focused on the hemiparetic leg may be an effective intervention strategy to consider for stroke rehabilitation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据