Different cadences and resistances in sub-maximal synchronous handcycling in able-bodied men: Effects on efficiency and force application

Abstract

BackgroundWith the introduction of an add-on handcycle, a crank system that can be placed in front of a wheelchair, handcycling was made widely available for daily life. With it, people go into town more easily, e.g. to do groceries; meet up with friends, etc. They have more independency and can be socially active. Our aim is to explore some settings of the handcycle, so that it can be optimally used as a transportation device. Therefore, the effects of cadence and added resistance on gross mechanical efficiency and force application during sub-maximal synchronous handcycling were investigated. We hypothesized that a cadence of 52 rpm with a higher resistance (35 W) would lead to a higher gross mechanical efficiency and a more tangential force application than a higher cadence of 70 rpm and no extra resistance (15 W).MethodsTwelve able-bodied men rode in an instrumented add-on handcycle on a motorized level treadmill at 1.94 m/s. They performed three sessions of three four-minute blocks of steady state exercise. Gear (70, 60 and 52 rpm) was changed in-between the blocks and resistance (rolling resistance +0 W, +10 W, +20 W) was changed across sessions, both in a counterbalanced order. 3D force production, oxygen uptake and heart rate were measured continuously. Gross mechanical efficiency (ME) and fraction of effective force (FEF) were calculated as main outcomes. The effects of cadence and resistance were analyzed using a repeated measures ANOVA (P<0.05) with Bonferroni-corrected post-hoc pairwise comparisons.ResultsWith a decrease in cadence a slight increase in ME (70 rpm: 5.5 (0.2)%, 60 rpm: 5.7 (0.2)%, 52 rpm: 5.8 (0.2)%, P = 0.008, η2p = 0.38), while an increase in FEF (70 rpm: 58.0 (3.2)%, 60 rpm: 66.0 (2.8)%, 52 rpm: 71.3 (2.3)%, P<0.001, η2p = 0.79) is seen simultaneously. Also with an increase in resistance an increase in ME (+0 W: 4.0 (0.2)%, +10 W: 6.0 (0.3)%, +20 W: 7.0 (0.2)%, P<0.001, η2p = 0.92) and FEF (+0 W: 59.0 (2.9)%, +10 W: 66.1 (3.4)%, +20 W: 70.2 (2.4)%, P<0.001, η2p = 0.56) was found.InterpretationA cadence of 52 rpm against a higher resistance of about 35 W leads to a more optimal direction of forces and is more mechanically efficient than propelling at a higher cadence or lower resistance. Therefore, changing gears on a handcycle is important, and it is advised to keep the linear hand velocity relatively low for locomotion purposes.

The Effect of Different Cadence on Paddling Gross Efficiency and Economy in Stand-Up Paddle Boarding

“…Similarly, higher cadences may be related to greater instability, which would imply higher needs of muscle activation for postural control and would ultimately lead to higher energy consumption, and therefore, worse efficiency [ 45 ]. When compared to studies in other sports, our findings were in agreement with those of Neilsen et al [ 46 ] and Jacobs et al [ 20 ] in cycling, Gonzalez-Aramendi [ 24 ] in traditional rowing, and Kraaijenbrink et al [ 25 ] in hand cycling, as all of them found that lower cadences were related to better efficiency and economy values. In contrast, Lucia et al [ 21 ] and Mora-Rodriguez and Aguado-Jimenez [ 47 ] in cycling, or Goosey et al [ 26 ] in hand cycling reported that higher cadences were more efficient and economical.…”

“…Considering that this sport takes place in natural environments, with changing wind and waves, the paddling cadence during open sea SUP races may not be constant. Several studies in other sports have suggested that some cadences are more efficient than others [ 6 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 ]. In the case of cyclists and triathletes, Jacobs et al [ 20 ] showed how lower cadences were more economical in trained subjects, while de Lucia et al [ 21 ] obtained opposite results with world-class cyclists.…”

“…In the case of cyclists and triathletes, Jacobs et al [ 20 ] showed how lower cadences were more economical in trained subjects, while de Lucia et al [ 21 ] obtained opposite results with world-class cyclists. In hand cycling, Kraaijenbrink et al [ 25 ] obtained better efficiency values with low cadences than with high cadences, while Goosey et al [ 26 ] comparing two crank lengths with two different cadences, obtained higher economy values with a short crank (180 mm) and higher cadence (85rev.min−1). With regard to running, Hafter et al [ 23 ] after 6 weeks of training increased the cadence, although they managed to modify all the kinematic parameters, they did not manage to decrease the efficiency.…”

Biomechanical and physiological differences between synchronous and asynchronous low intensity handcycling during practice-based learning in able-bodied men

“…The pre-and post-test consisted of level handcycling without additional resistance (~15 W) at 60 rpm [9,17,29]. In the three practice sessions, resistance (+ 0 W, + 10 W, + 20 W) and cadence (52, 60, 70 rpm) were varied as part of a bigger research project [30,31]. To ensure a physiological steady state, only the last minute of the selected four-minute blocks were analyzed with Matlab (MATLAB 2018b, Math-Works Inc., Natick, Massachusetts, USA).…”

Magnetic Resonance-Compatible Arm-Crank Ergometry: A New Platform Linking Whole-Body Calorimetry to Upper-Extremity Biomechanics and Arm Muscle Metabolism

“…Whole-body measures of exercise physiology in upper body exercise (e.g., (5,6)) are limited in their detail in both healthy and clinical populations. Intramuscular metabolic processes during dynamic exercise require different, more local and preferably non-invasive measures to more accurately monitor and understand the energetic processes of exercise, adaptation, practice or training in healthy as well as clinical and pathologic populations (7).…”