Comparison of Two Concurrent Respiratory Resistance Devices on Pulmonary Function and Time Trial Performance of Wheelchair Athletes (corrected and reprinted from previous issue)
Menu

Lyn Litchke, Lisa Lloyd, Eric Schmidt, Chris Russian, Robert F. ReardonComparison of Two Concurrent Respiratory Resistance Devices on Pulmonary Function and Time Trial Performance of Wheelchair Athletes (corrected and reprinted from previous issue)

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 nine-week pretest-posttest control group design, 24 male athletes were matched by lesion level, injury completeness, and rugby classification before random assignment to one of three groups: (a) CPTR, (b) CFR, or (c) control (CON). Maximum voluntary ventilation (MVV), maximum inspiratory pressure (MIP), and one-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


Author Lyn Litchke, Lisa Lloyd, Eric Schmidt, Chris Russian, Robert F. Reardon
Volume Vol 45, No 2 (2011)
Download PDF