2005
DOI: 10.1007/s00420-005-0076-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparisons of physiological and perceptual responses in healthy men and women during standardized arm cranking and task-specific pushing–pulling

Abstract: Based on the physiological differences, pushing-pulling is found to be metabolically less efficient than arm cranking. However, greater ratings of perceived exertion during pushing-pulling implies that the perception of effort can also be influenced by a low intensity task, such as pushing-pulling, if performed for a prolonged period. Occupational health professionals should be aware of the limitations of utilizing physiological and perceptual responses obtained only from standardized ergometric protocols in p… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 61 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Pushing and pulling involve a substantial amount of muscle and metabolic activity in the trunk and other body regions of workers. 31,56 However, the physiological contribution from these regions, in particular from lumbar muscles in terms of oxygenation and blood volume changes during pushing and pulling, are still limited in the literature (Table 2). An example of repetitive pushing and pulling task and typical trends of oxygenation and blood volume responses (from right erector spinae and biceps) in a male participant are demonstrated in Figure 3.…”
Section: Repetitive Pushing and Pullingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Pushing and pulling involve a substantial amount of muscle and metabolic activity in the trunk and other body regions of workers. 31,56 However, the physiological contribution from these regions, in particular from lumbar muscles in terms of oxygenation and blood volume changes during pushing and pulling, are still limited in the literature (Table 2). An example of repetitive pushing and pulling task and typical trends of oxygenation and blood volume responses (from right erector spinae and biceps) in a male participant are demonstrated in Figure 3.…”
Section: Repetitive Pushing and Pullingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The present study aimed to investigate whether a 7-weeks low intensity (30% heart rate reserve; HRR) handcycle training with a norm duration (30 min/session) can induce favourable effects in physical capacity of able-bodied untrained female subjects, thus simulating to some extent training effects in wheelchair users in early rehabilitation (Flandrois et al, 1986;Maikala & Bhambhani, 2006). Based on the results of previous studies (De Groot et al, 2008;Van den Berg et al, 2010), we hypothesized that a low-intensity (30% HRR) norm duration handcycle training program would improve mobility related parameters such as peak power output and submaximal efficiency.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Perception of effort is widely investigated during global locomotor tasks, such as walking or cycling, in both healthy and symptomatic populations (Au et al, 2017;Décombe et al, 2020;Flairty & Scheadler, 2020;Horstman et al, 1979;Zinoubi et al, 2018) to prescribe and monitor exercise (Azevedo et al, 2016;Eston & Parfitt, 2018;Impellizzeri et al, 2004). Perception of effort is also investigated during isolated motor tasks involving the upper or lower limb, in strength training program (Miller et al, 2009;Zourdos et al, 2016), in studies aiming at better understanding the regulation of endurance performance (Maikala & Bhambhani, 2006;Pageaux et al, 2013) or the mechanisms associated with the development of muscle fatigue during repetitive tasks Jacquet et al, 2021;Otto et al, 2019;Yang et al, 2019). To the best of our knowledge, most of the studies investigating perception of effort are performed during locomotor exercises or isolated exercises performed with the lower limbs (de Morree et al, 2014;Faelli et al, 2019;Luu et al, 2016;Meir et al, 2015).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%