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


  • Lyn Litchke
  • Lisa Lloyd
  • Eric Schmidt
  • Chris Russian
  • Robert F. Reardon


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. Significantlygreater 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





Practice Perspective