↓ Skip to main content

Effect of Three Different Grip Angles on Physiological Parameters During Laboratory Handcycling Test in Able-Bodied Participants

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Effect of Three Different Grip Angles on Physiological Parameters During Laboratory Handcycling Test in Able-Bodied Participants
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, November 2015
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2015.00331
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas Abel, Brendan Burkett, Barbara Thees, Stefan Schneider, Christopher D. Askew, Heiko K. Strüder

Abstract

Introduction: Handcycling is a relatively new wheelchair sport that has gained increased popularity for people with lower limb disabilities. The aim of this study was to examine the effect of three different grip positions on physical parameters during handcycling in a laboratory setting. Methods: Twenty one able-bodied participants performed three maximum incremental handcycling tests until exhaustion, each with a different grip angle. The angle between the grip and the crank was randomly set at 90° (horizontal), 0° (vertical), or 10° (diagonal). The initial load was 20 W and increased by 20 W each 5 min. In addition, participants performed a 20 s maximum effort. Results: The relative peak functional performance (W/kg), peak heart rate (bpm), associated lactate concentrations (mmol/l) and peak oxygen uptake per kilogram body weight (ml.min(-1).kg(-1)) for the different grip positions during the stage test were: (a) Horizontal: 1.43 ± 0.21 W/kg, 170.14 ± 12.81 bpm, 9.54 ± 1.93 mmol/l, 30.86 ± 4.57 ml/kg; (b) Vertical: 1.38 ± 0.20 W/kg, 171.81 ± 13.87 bpm, 9.91 ± 2.29 mmol/l, 29.75 ± 5.13 ml/kg; (c) Diagonal: 1.40 ± 0.22 W/kg, 169.19 ± 13.31 bpm, 9.34 ± 2.36 mmol/l, 29.39 ± 4.70 ml/kg. Statistically significant (p < 0.05) differences could only be found for lactate concentration between the vertical grip position and the other grips during submaximal handcycling. Conclusion: The orientation of three different grip angles made no difference to the peak load achieved during an incremental handcycling test and a 20 s maximum effort. At submaximal load, higher lactate concentrations were found when the vertical grip position was used, suggesting that this position may be less efficient than the alternative diagonal or horizontal grip positions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 53 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 17%
Student > Bachelor 8 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 8%
Researcher 4 8%
Other 10 19%
Unknown 11 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 17 32%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 6%
Engineering 3 6%
Other 9 17%
Unknown 10 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 January 2016.
All research outputs
#13,959,398
of 22,833,393 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#4,904
of 13,603 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#195,659
of 386,225 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#63
of 125 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,833,393 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,603 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 386,225 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 125 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.