The effect of the gravity loading countermeasure skinsuit upon movement and strength

Philip Alexander Carvil; Julia Attias; Simon Evetts; James Waldie; David Andrew Green

doi:10.1519/JSC.0000000000001460

The effect of the gravity loading countermeasure skinsuit upon movement and strength

Philip Alexander Carvil, Julia Attias, Simon Evetts, James Waldie, David Andrew Green

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

27 Citations (Scopus)

422 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Effective countermeasures against musculoskeletal de-conditioning induced by microgravity and disuse are required. A simple alternative to provision of artificial gravity by centrifugation, is compressive axial loading, the Russian "Pingvin" suit was the first wearable suit to apply this concept, using bungee cords, tethered, around the shoulders and feet. However, poor loading characteristics, severe thermal and movement discomfort were reported. The gravity loading countermeasure skinsuit (GLCS) uses a bidirectional weave to generate staged axial loading from shoulders to feet, better mimicking how Earth's gravity induces progressive loading head to foot. The Mk III GLCS's loading was evaluated and tolerability assessed during maximal joint motion, ambulation and selected strength exercises.

METHOD: Eight subjects (5 male and 3 female; 28±3yrs; 179±0.1cm; and 74.8±2.9kg) having given written informed consent, had a Mk III GLCS individually tailored. Axial loading imparted, body height, joint range of motion (ROM), ambulation and strength tests (12-rep max) were performed in the GLCS and gym attire (GYM), with subjective (RPE, thermal comfort, movement discomfort and body control) ratings recorded throughout.

RESULTS: GLCS provided significant axial loading when standing but significantly reduced knee (-13), spinal (-28) and shoulder flexion/extension ROM (-34/-13), in addition to sit and reach (-12.8cm). No thermal issues were reported but there was an increase in subjective discomfort. GLCS did not significantly impede strength exercise, with the exception of shoulder press (15.7±4.1vs.18.4±3.4kg).

CONCLUSION: The GLCS (Mk III) demonstrates potential as a countermeasure by providing tolerable, static axial loading. Furthermore, it may serve as a elastic-like strength exercise adjunct, which may have utility as a rehabilitation modality after further design refinement.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	154-161
Journal	Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000001460
Publication status	E-pub ahead of print - 21 Apr 2016

Access to Document

10.1519/JSC.0000000000001460

The effect of the_VARVIL_Publishedonline21April2016_GREEN AAMAccepted author manuscript, 911 KB

Cite this

@article{0b317b477ae249e98cc175dd827fc0f4,

title = "The effect of the gravity loading countermeasure skinsuit upon movement and strength",

abstract = "INTRODUCTION: Effective countermeasures against musculoskeletal de-conditioning induced by microgravity and disuse are required. A simple alternative to provision of artificial gravity by centrifugation, is compressive axial loading, the Russian {"}Pingvin{"} suit was the first wearable suit to apply this concept, using bungee cords, tethered, around the shoulders and feet. However, poor loading characteristics, severe thermal and movement discomfort were reported. The gravity loading countermeasure skinsuit (GLCS) uses a bidirectional weave to generate staged axial loading from shoulders to feet, better mimicking how Earth's gravity induces progressive loading head to foot. The Mk III GLCS's loading was evaluated and tolerability assessed during maximal joint motion, ambulation and selected strength exercises.METHOD: Eight subjects (5 male and 3 female; 28±3yrs; 179±0.1cm; and 74.8±2.9kg) having given written informed consent, had a Mk III GLCS individually tailored. Axial loading imparted, body height, joint range of motion (ROM), ambulation and strength tests (12-rep max) were performed in the GLCS and gym attire (GYM), with subjective (RPE, thermal comfort, movement discomfort and body control) ratings recorded throughout.RESULTS: GLCS provided significant axial loading when standing but significantly reduced knee (-13), spinal (-28) and shoulder flexion/extension ROM (-34/-13), in addition to sit and reach (-12.8cm). No thermal issues were reported but there was an increase in subjective discomfort. GLCS did not significantly impede strength exercise, with the exception of shoulder press (15.7±4.1vs.18.4±3.4kg).CONCLUSION: The GLCS (Mk III) demonstrates potential as a countermeasure by providing tolerable, static axial loading. Furthermore, it may serve as a elastic-like strength exercise adjunct, which may have utility as a rehabilitation modality after further design refinement.",

author = "Carvil, {Philip Alexander} and Julia Attias and Simon Evetts and James Waldie and Green, {David Andrew}",

year = "2016",

month = apr,

day = "21",

doi = "10.1519/JSC.0000000000001460",

language = "English",

pages = "154--161",

journal = "Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research",

issn = "1064-8011",

publisher = "NSCA National Strength and Conditioning Association",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The effect of the gravity loading countermeasure skinsuit upon movement and strength

AU - Carvil, Philip Alexander

AU - Attias, Julia

AU - Evetts, Simon

AU - Waldie, James

AU - Green, David Andrew

PY - 2016/4/21

Y1 - 2016/4/21

N2 - INTRODUCTION: Effective countermeasures against musculoskeletal de-conditioning induced by microgravity and disuse are required. A simple alternative to provision of artificial gravity by centrifugation, is compressive axial loading, the Russian "Pingvin" suit was the first wearable suit to apply this concept, using bungee cords, tethered, around the shoulders and feet. However, poor loading characteristics, severe thermal and movement discomfort were reported. The gravity loading countermeasure skinsuit (GLCS) uses a bidirectional weave to generate staged axial loading from shoulders to feet, better mimicking how Earth's gravity induces progressive loading head to foot. The Mk III GLCS's loading was evaluated and tolerability assessed during maximal joint motion, ambulation and selected strength exercises.METHOD: Eight subjects (5 male and 3 female; 28±3yrs; 179±0.1cm; and 74.8±2.9kg) having given written informed consent, had a Mk III GLCS individually tailored. Axial loading imparted, body height, joint range of motion (ROM), ambulation and strength tests (12-rep max) were performed in the GLCS and gym attire (GYM), with subjective (RPE, thermal comfort, movement discomfort and body control) ratings recorded throughout.RESULTS: GLCS provided significant axial loading when standing but significantly reduced knee (-13), spinal (-28) and shoulder flexion/extension ROM (-34/-13), in addition to sit and reach (-12.8cm). No thermal issues were reported but there was an increase in subjective discomfort. GLCS did not significantly impede strength exercise, with the exception of shoulder press (15.7±4.1vs.18.4±3.4kg).CONCLUSION: The GLCS (Mk III) demonstrates potential as a countermeasure by providing tolerable, static axial loading. Furthermore, it may serve as a elastic-like strength exercise adjunct, which may have utility as a rehabilitation modality after further design refinement.

AB - INTRODUCTION: Effective countermeasures against musculoskeletal de-conditioning induced by microgravity and disuse are required. A simple alternative to provision of artificial gravity by centrifugation, is compressive axial loading, the Russian "Pingvin" suit was the first wearable suit to apply this concept, using bungee cords, tethered, around the shoulders and feet. However, poor loading characteristics, severe thermal and movement discomfort were reported. The gravity loading countermeasure skinsuit (GLCS) uses a bidirectional weave to generate staged axial loading from shoulders to feet, better mimicking how Earth's gravity induces progressive loading head to foot. The Mk III GLCS's loading was evaluated and tolerability assessed during maximal joint motion, ambulation and selected strength exercises.METHOD: Eight subjects (5 male and 3 female; 28±3yrs; 179±0.1cm; and 74.8±2.9kg) having given written informed consent, had a Mk III GLCS individually tailored. Axial loading imparted, body height, joint range of motion (ROM), ambulation and strength tests (12-rep max) were performed in the GLCS and gym attire (GYM), with subjective (RPE, thermal comfort, movement discomfort and body control) ratings recorded throughout.RESULTS: GLCS provided significant axial loading when standing but significantly reduced knee (-13), spinal (-28) and shoulder flexion/extension ROM (-34/-13), in addition to sit and reach (-12.8cm). No thermal issues were reported but there was an increase in subjective discomfort. GLCS did not significantly impede strength exercise, with the exception of shoulder press (15.7±4.1vs.18.4±3.4kg).CONCLUSION: The GLCS (Mk III) demonstrates potential as a countermeasure by providing tolerable, static axial loading. Furthermore, it may serve as a elastic-like strength exercise adjunct, which may have utility as a rehabilitation modality after further design refinement.

U2 - 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001460

DO - 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001460

M3 - Article

C2 - 27135470

SN - 1064-8011

SP - 154

EP - 161

JO - Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

JF - Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

ER -

The effect of the gravity loading countermeasure skinsuit upon movement and strength

Abstract

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this