Metabolic Demands of Rock Climbing in Transfemoral Amputees

Abstract

This pilot study compared the energy expenditure required to climb an indoor rock wall, in amputees utilizing five prosthetic configurations. Three experienced climbers (1M age 21 yr, 2F ages 30 and 49 yr) with unilateral transfemoral amputation climbed a 9.14 m indoor rock wall, 5.9 Yosemite Decimal Scale rating, using the following prosthetic configurations: 1. no prosthesis; 2. stubby prosthesis-foot forward; 3. stubby prosthesis-foot backward; 4. articulated prosthesis-knee unlocked; 5. articulated prosthesis-knee locked. Subjects climbed three times with each configuration resulting in 15 climbs per subject. Metabolic data was collected using the COSMED K4b² system. V˙O₂ was 15, 18 and 20% greater in the articulated unlocked condition (mean±SE: 20.5±0.8 ml·kg⁻¹·min⁻¹), and 11, 13 and 15% greater in the articulated locked condition (19.7±0.9 ml·kg⁻¹·min⁻¹), compared to the no prosthesis (17.8±0.7 ml·kg⁻¹·min⁻¹), stubby backward (17.4±0.7 ml·kg⁻¹·min⁻¹) and stubby forward (17.1±0.9 ml·kg⁻¹·min⁻¹) conditions. Participants expended 11–20% more energy using the articulated prostheses than with the stubby and no prosthesis conditions. In persons with transfemoral amputation, use of an articulated prosthesis in indoor rock climbing may be a disadvantage in many aspects including competition, training, rehabilitation and satisfaction with the activity.

Key words

amputation - energy expenditure - lower extremity - prosthesis

References

• 1 Bertuzzi RC, Franchini E, Kokubun E, Kiss MA. Energy system contributions in indoor rock climbing.  Eur J Appl Physiol. 2007;  101 293-300
• 2 Billat V, Palleja P, Charlaix T, Rizzardo P, Janel N. Energy specificity of rock climbing and aerobic capacity in competitive sport rock climbers.  J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 1995;  35 20-24
• 3 Booth J, Marino F, Hill C, Gwinn T. Energy cost of sport rock climbing in elite performers.  Br J Sports Med. 1999;  33 14-18
• 4 Borg GA. Psychophysical basis of perceived exertion.  Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1982;  14 377-381
• 5 Extremity Games Web site [Internet] . [cited 2008 Dec 16]. , Available from: http://www.extremitygames.com
• 6 Giles LV, Rhodes EC, Taunton JE. The physiology of rock climbing.  Sports Med. 2006;  36 529-545
• 7 Mermier CM, Janot JM, Parker DL, Swan JG. Physiological and anthropometric determinants of sport climbing performance.  Br J Sports Med. 2000;  34 359-365
• 8 Naval Medical Center San Diego Web site [Internet] . Comprehensive Combat and Complex Casuality Care; [cited 2008 Dec 16]. , Available from: http://www-nmcsd.med.navy.mil/service/services_view.cfm?csid=98
• 9 Parfitt G, Gledhill C. The effect of choice of exercise mode on psychological responses.  Psychol Sport Exerc. 2004;  5 111-117
• 10 Schöffl VR, Möckel F, Köstermeyer G, Roloff I, Küpper T. Development of a performance diagnosis of the anaerobic strength endurance of the forearm flexor muscles in sport climbing.  Int J Sports Med. 2006;  27 205-211
• 11 Sheel AW. Physiology of Sport Rock Climbing.  Br J Sports Med. 2004;  38 355-359
• 12 Sheel AW, Seddon N, Knight A, McKenzie D, Warburton D. Physiological responses to indoor rock-climbing and their relationship to maximal cycle ergometry.  Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2003;  35 1225-1231
• 13 Watts PB, Drobish KM. Physiological responses to simulated rock climbing at different angles.  Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1998;  30 1118-1122
• 14 U. S. Army Web site [Internet] . Wilson E. $50 Million Rehabilitation Center Opens on Fort Sam Houston; [cited 2007 Nov 26]. , Available from: http://www.army.mil/-news/2007/01/30/1570-50-million-rehabilitation-center-opens-on-fort-sam-houston
• 15 U. S. Department of Defense Web site [Internet] . Baker FW. New Amputee Care Center Opens at Walter Reed; [cited 2007 Nov 26]. , >Available from: http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=47432

Correspondence