Comparison of Two Concurrent Respiratory Resistance Devices on Pulmonary Function and Time Trial Performance of Wheel Chair Athletes
Menu

Lyn Litchke, Lisa Lloyd, Eric Schmidt, Chris Russian, Robert ReardonComparison of Two Concurrent Respiratory Resistance Devices on Pulmonary Function and Time Trial Performance of Wheel Chair Athletes

This study compared the effects of a concurrent flow resistance (CFR) device versus a concurrent pressure threshold resistance (CPTR) device on lung function and aerobic capacity in wheelchair rugby (WR) athletes with tetraplegia. Using a 9-week pretest-posttest control group design, 24 male athletes were matched by lesion level, injury completeness, and rugby classification before random assignment to 1 of 3 groups: (a) CPTR, (b) CFR, or (c) control (CON). Maximum voluntary ventilation (MVV), maximum inspiratory pressure (MIP), and 1-mile time trial performance (TT) were measured. Significantly greater improvements were observed in time trial performance for CPTR versus CON (p = .038) and in MVV for CFR versus CPTR (p = .027). The results support the use of training with a CFR device in order to improve overall lung function, and to a lesser extent, with a CPTR device to improve cardiorespiratory endurance. Any effect that a training device may have on the cardiorespiratory endurance of WR athletes is worthy of consideration.

Author Lyn Litchke, Lisa Lloyd, Eric Schmidt, Chris Russian, Robert Reardon
Volume Vol 44, No 1 (2010)
Download PDF