Limits...
Effects of variable practice on the motor learning outcomes in manual wheelchair propulsion

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

Background: Handrim wheelchair propulsion is a cyclic skill that needs to be learned during rehabilitation. It has been suggested that more variability in propulsion technique benefits the motor learning process of wheelchair propulsion.

Background: The purpose of this study was to determine the influence of variable practice on the motor learning outcomes of wheelchair propulsion in able-bodied participants. Variable practice was introduced in the form of wheelchair basketball practice and wheelchair-skill practice. Motor learning was operationalized as improvements in mechanical efficiency and propulsion technique.

Methods: Eleven Participants in the variable practice group and 12 participants in the control group performed an identical pre-test and a post-test. Pre- and post-test were performed in a wheelchair on a motor-driven treadmill (1.11 m/s) at a relative power output of 0.23 W/kg. Energy consumption and the propulsion technique variables with their respective coefficient of variation were calculated. Between the pre- and the post-test the variable practice group received 7 practice sessions. During the practice sessions participants performed one-hour of variable practice, consisting of five wheelchair-skill tasks and a 30 min wheelchair basketball game. The control group did not receive any practice between the pre- and the post-test.

Results: Comparison of the pre- and the post-test showed that the variable practice group significantly improved the mechanical efficiency (4.5 ± 0.6% → 5.7 ± 0.7%) in contrast to the control group (4.5 ± 0.6% → 4.4 ± 0.5%) (group x time interaction effect p < 0.001).With regard to propulsion technique, both groups significantly reduced the push frequency and increased the contact angle of the hand with the handrim (within group, time effect). No significant group × time interaction effects were found for propulsion technique. With regard to propulsion variability, the variable practice group increased variability when compared to the control group (interaction effect p < 0.001).

Conclusions: Compared to a control, variable practice, resulted in an increase in mechanical efficiency and increased variability. Interestingly, the large relative improvement in mechanical efficiency was concomitant with only moderate improvements in the propulsion technique, which were similar in the control group, suggesting that other factors besides propulsion technique contributed to the lower energy expenditure.

Electronic supplementary material: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12984-016-0209-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

No MeSH data available.


Change in propulsion technique between the pre- and post-test in the variable practice (N = 11) and the control group (N = 12). Mean and standard error of original data are provided per practice block. The time x group interaction effect was not significant for all propulsion variables
© Copyright Policy - OpenAccess
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC5120477&req=5

Fig5: Change in propulsion technique between the pre- and post-test in the variable practice (N = 11) and the control group (N = 12). Mean and standard error of original data are provided per practice block. The time x group interaction effect was not significant for all propulsion variables

Mentions: The differences in propulsion technique between the pre- and post-test are presented in Table 3 and Fig. 5. Both groups significantly reduced the push frequency and increased the contact angle of the hand with the handrim. Additionally, the variable practice group reduced the braking torque at (de) coupling. No significant changes were found in both groups for the positive work per push and max torque per push. The time x group interaction effect was not significant for all propulsion variables implying that there were no differences in the change of propulsion technique over time between groups.Fig. 5


Effects of variable practice on the motor learning outcomes in manual wheelchair propulsion
Change in propulsion technique between the pre- and post-test in the variable practice (N = 11) and the control group (N = 12). Mean and standard error of original data are provided per practice block. The time x group interaction effect was not significant for all propulsion variables
© Copyright Policy - OpenAccess
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC5120477&req=5

Fig5: Change in propulsion technique between the pre- and post-test in the variable practice (N = 11) and the control group (N = 12). Mean and standard error of original data are provided per practice block. The time x group interaction effect was not significant for all propulsion variables
Mentions: The differences in propulsion technique between the pre- and post-test are presented in Table 3 and Fig. 5. Both groups significantly reduced the push frequency and increased the contact angle of the hand with the handrim. Additionally, the variable practice group reduced the braking torque at (de) coupling. No significant changes were found in both groups for the positive work per push and max torque per push. The time x group interaction effect was not significant for all propulsion variables implying that there were no differences in the change of propulsion technique over time between groups.Fig. 5

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

Background: Handrim wheelchair propulsion is a cyclic skill that needs to be learned during rehabilitation. It has been suggested that more variability in propulsion technique benefits the motor learning process of wheelchair propulsion.

Background: The purpose of this study was to determine the influence of variable practice on the motor learning outcomes of wheelchair propulsion in able-bodied participants. Variable practice was introduced in the form of wheelchair basketball practice and wheelchair-skill practice. Motor learning was operationalized as improvements in mechanical efficiency and propulsion technique.

Methods: Eleven Participants in the variable practice group and 12 participants in the control group performed an identical pre-test and a post-test. Pre- and post-test were performed in a wheelchair on a motor-driven treadmill (1.11 m/s) at a relative power output of 0.23 W/kg. Energy consumption and the propulsion technique variables with their respective coefficient of variation were calculated. Between the pre- and the post-test the variable practice group received 7 practice sessions. During the practice sessions participants performed one-hour of variable practice, consisting of five wheelchair-skill tasks and a 30 min wheelchair basketball game. The control group did not receive any practice between the pre- and the post-test.

Results: Comparison of the pre- and the post-test showed that the variable practice group significantly improved the mechanical efficiency (4.5 ± 0.6% → 5.7 ± 0.7%) in contrast to the control group (4.5 ± 0.6% → 4.4 ± 0.5%) (group x time interaction effect p < 0.001).With regard to propulsion technique, both groups significantly reduced the push frequency and increased the contact angle of the hand with the handrim (within group, time effect). No significant group × time interaction effects were found for propulsion technique. With regard to propulsion variability, the variable practice group increased variability when compared to the control group (interaction effect p < 0.001).

Conclusions: Compared to a control, variable practice, resulted in an increase in mechanical efficiency and increased variability. Interestingly, the large relative improvement in mechanical efficiency was concomitant with only moderate improvements in the propulsion technique, which were similar in the control group, suggesting that other factors besides propulsion technique contributed to the lower energy expenditure.

Electronic supplementary material: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12984-016-0209-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

No MeSH data available.