7 research outputs found
Fun versus Practical: Physiological Responses and Preference of Exercise Equipment
Until the invention of the rowing machine, rowing was only attainable on water. The Champiot Ultra Rowing Bike allows athletes to row on land and remains mobile. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to determine whether the Rowing Bike is more efficient and enjoyable than a traditional rowing machine. METHODS: Energy expenditure, heart rate, and rate perceived exertion (Borg Scale) were evaluated on 20 males (aged 23.75 ± 2.613) and 20 females\u27 (23.05 ± 3.605) while riding the rowing bike and the traditional rowing machine for 20 minutes at 75 percent of their age-predicted maximal heart rates. Post-testing, subjects completed a preference survey. A mixed-design ANOVA in SPSS version 18.00 analyzed and compared all physiological responses and gender differences. RESULTS: Significant differences (p \u3c 0.01) were found for energy expenditure, VE and RPE (p \u3c 0.05) on the different machines. Significant differences were also found when comparing the physiological responses of genders. The questionnaire showed significantly that people prefer the Rowing Bike. CONCLUSION: The data collected indicated that the subjects prefer the row bike; however the rowing machine provides a more quality workout.https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/u_poster_2015/1000/thumbnail.jp
Fun versus Practical: Physiological Responses and Preference of Exercise Equipment
The elliptical cross trainer has become a popular a mode of exercise, but can only be used indoors. The StreetStrider was designed as an outdoor elliptical-bike. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to determine whether the elliptical or the StreetStrider was more enjoyable, and to compare the physiological variables for energy expenditure, heart rate (HR), VO2, and Rate of Perceived Exertion (RPE). METHODS: Thirty participants (15 male, 15 female, mean age=22±2) from Cleveland State University exercised for 20 minutes at 75% of their age predicted maximal heart rate on the StreetStrider and elliptical. Energy expenditure was measured with a COSMED K4b metabolic system. Participants’ RPE was recorded every five minutes using the Borg Scale for Rate of Perceived Exertion. Data was analyzed using SPSS version 18. A paired sample t-test compared physiological responses. A one-way ANOVA analyzed gender differences. A significance level of .05 was used to determine significance. RESULTS: No significant differences were shown in energy expenditure (p=.930), HR (p=.098), or in average RPE (p=.529) between the exercise trials. A preference survey concluded that most subjects found the StreetStrider more enjoyable than the elliptical. CONCLUSION: The StreetStrider is more enjoyable than the elliptical and as effective in energy expenditure, and could serve as a substitute for the elliptical.https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/u_poster_2014/1034/thumbnail.jp
Comparison of Electronic and Mechanical Handgrip Devices in Lowering Blood Pressure
Hypertension causes billions of deaths per year (Millar et al., 2013). The Zona PlusTM is an expensive tool designed to lower blood pressure (BP) using isometric exercise. This exercise may be achieved using a less expensive Handgrip Dynamometer. PURPOSE: The purpose of this research is to determine if the Zona or Handgrip Dynamometer is more efficient at lowering BP and most cost effective for patients. METHODS: Twenty subjects used the Zona and twenty subjects used the dynamometer three times per week for six weeks. BP was taken once per week prior to the treatment. A maximum voluntary contraction (MVC) was recorded for each hand before every treatment. Participants were required to hold the handgrip at 30% of their MVC for four two-minute contractions. A paired samples T test was used to analyze changes in participants’ BP. A one-way ANOVA was used to compare the BP changes between the Zona and the Handgrip. RESULTS: The results indicated no significant changes in participants’ pre- and post- treatment after training when using the Zona for either stolic (p=0.225) or diastolic BP (p=1.000). There was also no significant difference in participants’ post treatment systolic BP (p=0.199), however, the post treatment for diastolic increased significantly (p=0.027 BP between those that used the Zona PlusTM and Handgrip Dynamometer. CONCLUSION: Though the Dynamometer is more cost efficient, neither the Zona nor the Dynamometer resulted in lowered BP.https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/u_poster_2014/1037/thumbnail.jp
Fun versus Practical: Physiological Responses and Preference of Exercise Equipment
Until the invention of the rowing machine, rowing was only attainable on water. The Champiot Ultra Rowing Bike allows athletes to row on land and remains mobile. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to determine whether the Rowing Bike is more efficient and enjoyable than a traditional rowing machine. METHODS: Energy expenditure, heart rate, and rate perceived exertion (Borg Scale) were evaluated on 20 males (aged 23.75 ± 2.613) and 20 females\u27 (23.05 ± 3.605) while riding the rowing bike and the traditional rowing machine for 20 minutes at 75 percent of their age-predicted maximal heart rates. Post-testing, subjects completed a preference survey. A mixed-design ANOVA in SPSS version 18.00 analyzed and compared all physiological responses and gender differences. RESULTS: Significant differences (p \u3c 0.01) were found for energy expenditure, VE and RPE (p \u3c 0.05) on the different machines. Significant differences were also found when comparing the physiological responses of genders. The questionnaire showed significantly that people prefer the Rowing Bike. CONCLUSION: The data collected indicated that the subjects prefer the row bike; however the rowing machine provides a more quality workout.https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/u_poster_2015/1000/thumbnail.jp
Comparison of Electronic and Mechanical Handgrip Devices in Lowering Blood Pressure
Hypertension causes billions of deaths per year (Millar et al., 2013). The Zona PlusTM is an expensive tool designed to lower blood pressure (BP) using isometric exercise. This exercise may be achieved using a less expensive Handgrip Dynamometer. PURPOSE: The purpose of this research is to determine if the Zona or Handgrip Dynamometer is more efficient at lowering BP and most cost effective for patients. METHODS: Twenty subjects used the Zona and twenty subjects used the dynamometer three times per week for six weeks. BP was taken once per week prior to the treatment. A maximum voluntary contraction (MVC) was recorded for each hand before every treatment. Participants were required to hold the handgrip at 30% of their MVC for four two-minute contractions. A paired samples T test was used to analyze changes in participants’ BP. A one-way ANOVA was used to compare the BP changes between the Zona and the Handgrip. RESULTS: The results indicated no significant changes in participants’ pre- and post- treatment after training when using the Zona for either stolic (p=0.225) or diastolic BP (p=1.000). There was also no significant difference in participants’ post treatment systolic BP (p=0.199), however, the post treatment for diastolic increased significantly (p=0.027 BP between those that used the Zona PlusTM and Handgrip Dynamometer. CONCLUSION: Though the Dynamometer is more cost efficient, neither the Zona nor the Dynamometer resulted in lowered BP.https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/u_poster_2014/1037/thumbnail.jp
Fun versus Practical: Physiological Responses and Preference of Exercise Equipment
The elliptical cross trainer has become a popular a mode of exercise, but can only be used indoors. The StreetStrider was designed as an outdoor elliptical-bike. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to determine whether the elliptical or the StreetStrider was more enjoyable, and to compare the physiological variables for energy expenditure, heart rate (HR), VO2, and Rate of Perceived Exertion (RPE). METHODS: Thirty participants (15 male, 15 female, mean age=22±2) from Cleveland State University exercised for 20 minutes at 75% of their age predicted maximal heart rate on the StreetStrider and elliptical. Energy expenditure was measured with a COSMED K4b metabolic system. Participants’ RPE was recorded every five minutes using the Borg Scale for Rate of Perceived Exertion. Data was analyzed using SPSS version 18. A paired sample t-test compared physiological responses. A one-way ANOVA analyzed gender differences. A significance level of .05 was used to determine significance. RESULTS: No significant differences were shown in energy expenditure (p=.930), HR (p=.098), or in average RPE (p=.529) between the exercise trials. A preference survey concluded that most subjects found the StreetStrider more enjoyable than the elliptical. CONCLUSION: The StreetStrider is more enjoyable than the elliptical and as effective in energy expenditure, and could serve as a substitute for the elliptical.https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/u_poster_2014/1034/thumbnail.jp
Recommended from our members
A multicenter retrospective cohort study to characterize patients hospitalized with MIS-A and COVID-19 in the United States, 2020-2021
BACKGROUNDThe diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2-associated multisystem inflammatory syndrome in adults (MIS-A) requires distinguishing it from acute COVID-19 and may impact clinical management. METHODSIn this retrospective cohort study, we applied the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention case definition to identify adults hospitalized with MIS-A at six academic medical centers during March 1, 2020-December 31, 2021. MIS-A patients were matched on age group, sex, site, and admission date at a 1:2 ratio to patients hospitalized with acute symptomatic COVID-19. Conditional logistic regression was used to compare demographics, presenting symptoms, laboratory and imaging results, treatments administered, and outcomes between cohorts. RESULTSThrough medical record review of 10,223 patients hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2-associated illness, we identified 53 MIS-A cases. Compared with 106 matched COVID-19 patients, MIS-A patients were more likely to be non-Hispanic Black and less likely to be non-Hispanic White. MIS-A patients more likely had laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 ≥ 14 days prior to hospitalization, more likely had positive in-hospital SARS-CoV-2 serologic testing, and more often presented with gastrointestinal symptoms and chest pain. They were less likely to have underlying medical conditions and to present with cough and dyspnea. On admission, MIS-A patients had higher neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, C-reactive protein, ferritin, procalcitonin and D-dimer, compared with COVID-19 patients. MIS-A patients had longer hospitalization and more likely required intensive care admission, invasive mechanical ventilation, and vasopressors. Mortality was 6% in both cohorts. CONCLUSIONSCompared with patients with acute symptomatic COVID-19, adults with MIS-A more often manifest certain symptoms and laboratory findings early during hospitalization. These features may facilitate diagnosis and management