Submaximal cardiopulmonary thresholds on a robotics-assisted tilt table, a cycle and a treadmill: a comparative analysis

Saengsuwan, Jittima; Nef, Tobias; Laubacher, M; Hunt, KJ (2015). Submaximal cardiopulmonary thresholds on a robotics-assisted tilt table, a cycle and a treadmill: a comparative analysis. Biomedical engineering online, 14(1), p. 104. BioMed Central 10.1186/s12938-015-0099-0

Preview

Text art%3A10.1186%2Fs12938-015-0099-0.pdf - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons: Attribution (CC-BY). Download (1MB) | Preview

BACKGROUND: The robotics-assisted tilt table (RATT), including actuators for tilting and cyclical leg movement, is used for rehabilitation of severely disabled neurological patients. Following further engineering development of the system, i.e. the addition of force sensors and visual bio-feedback, patients can actively participate in exercise testing and training on the device. Peak cardiopulmonary performance parameters were previously investigated, but it also important to compare submaximal parameters with standard devices. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of the RATT for estimation of submaximal exercise thresholds by comparison with a cycle ergometer and a treadmill.
METHODS: 17 healthy subjects randomly performed six maximal individualized incremental exercise tests, with two tests on each of the three exercise modalities. The ventilatory anaerobic threshold (VAT) and respiratory compensation point (RCP) were determined from breath-by-breath data.
RESULTS: VAT and RCP on the RATT were lower than the cycle ergometer and the treadmill: oxygen uptake (V'O2) at VAT was [mean (SD)] 1.2 (0.3), 1.5 (0.4) and 1.6 (0.5) L/min, respectively (p < 0.001); V'O2 at RCP was 1.7 (0.4), 2.3 (0.8) and 2.6 (0.9) L/min, respectively (p = 0.001). High correlations for VAT and RCP were found between the RATT vs the cycle ergometer and RATT vs the treadmill (R on the range 0.69-0.80). VAT and RCP demonstrated excellent test-retest reliability for all three devices (ICC from 0.81 to 0.98). Mean differences between the test and retest values on each device were close to zero. The ventilatory equivalent for O2 at VAT for the RATT and cycle ergometer were similar and both were higher than the treadmill. The ventilatory equivalent for CO2 at RCP was similar for all devices. Ventilatory equivalent parameters demonstrated fair-to-excellent reliability and repeatability.
CONCLUSIONS: It is feasible to use the RATT for estimation of submaximal exercise thresholds: VAT and RCP on the RATT were lower than the cycle ergometer and the treadmill, but there were high correlations between the RATT vs the cycle ergometer and vs the treadmill. Repeatability and test-retest reliability of all submaximal threshold parameters from the RATT were comparable to those of standard devices.

Interest & Impact

Downloads

201 since deposited on 03 Feb 2016
9 in the past 12 months

Citations

5 Citations in Web of Science ®
6 Citations in Scopus

Search

in Google Scholar™

Services

Actions (login required)

Edit item

Actions (login required)

Edit item