Effects of arch-support orthoses on ground reaction forces and lower extremity kinematics related to running at various inclinations

AbstractPurpose. It is posited that functional laterality is influenced by the generation and conduction of neural signals and therefore associated with sensorimotor control. The question arises if symmetry or asymmetry in sensorimotor processing affects the development of symmetric or asymmetric motor programs in the lower extremities. The purpose of the study was to examine the mechanisms of the human mobility moto-control - the process of maintaining body balance in a standing position through an appropriate course of distribution of ground reaction forces in a time frame, in a situation requiring lower extremity movement symmetry. Methods. The autocorrelation function was calculated for ground reaction forces (in the three orthogonal axes) registered during 45 s of bipedal upright stance in two conditions (eyes open and closed). Results. Minor albeit significant deficiencies in postural muscle control were revealed as a function of time, as evidenced in the decay of the autocorrelation function to zero (T

Download Full-text

Surface effects on ground reaction forces and lower extremity kinematics in running

Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise ◽

10.1097/00005768-200011000-00016 ◽

2000 ◽

Vol 32 (11) ◽

pp. 1919-1926 ◽

Cited By ~ 125

Author(s):

SHARON J. DIXON ◽

ANDREW C. COLLOP ◽

MARK E. BATT

Keyword(s):

Lower Extremity ◽

Surface Effects ◽

Ground Reaction Forces ◽

Reaction Forces

Download Full-text

An experimental in vivo method for analysis of local deformation on tibia, with simultaneous measures of ground reaction forces, lower extremity muscle activity and joint motion

Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports ◽

10.1111/j.1600-0838.1997.tb00131.x ◽

2007 ◽

Vol 7 (3) ◽

pp. 144-151 ◽

Cited By ~ 15

Author(s):

C. Rolf ◽

P. Westblad ◽

I. Ekenman ◽

A. Lundberg ◽

N. Murphy ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Lower Extremity ◽

Muscle Activity ◽

Local Deformation ◽

Ground Reaction Forces ◽

Joint Motion ◽

Lower Extremity Muscle ◽

Reaction Forces

Download Full-text

Ground Reaction Forces and Lower Extremity Kinematics When Running With Suppressed Arm Swing

Journal of Biomechanical Engineering ◽

10.1115/1.4000088 ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 131 (12) ◽

Cited By ~ 19

Author(s):

Ross H. Miller ◽

Graham E. Caldwell ◽

Richard E. A. Van Emmerik ◽

Brian R. Umberger ◽

Joseph Hamill

Keyword(s):

Lower Extremity ◽

Research Question ◽

Ground Reaction Forces ◽

Joint Angles ◽

Arm Swing ◽

Musculoskeletal Models ◽

Reaction Forces ◽

Cross Correlations ◽

Arm Motion ◽

Hip Flexion

The role of arm swing in running has been minimally described, and the contributions of arm motion to lower extremity joint kinematics and external force generation are unknown. These contributions may have implications in the design of musculoskeletal models for computer simulations of running, since previous models have usually not included articulating arm segments. 3D stance phase lower extremity joint angles and ground reaction forces (GRFs) were determined for seven subjects running normally, and running under two conditions of arm restraint. When arm swing was suppressed, the peak vertical GRF decreased by 10–13% bodyweight, and the peak lateral GRF increased by 4–6% bodyweight. Changes in peak joint angles on the order of 1–5 deg were observed for hip flexion, hip adduction, knee flexion, knee adduction, and ankle abduction. The effect sizes (ES) were small to moderate (ES<0.8) for most of the peak GRF differences, but large (ES>0.8) for most of the peak joint angle differences. These changes suggest that suppression of arm swing induces subtle but statistically significant changes in the kinetic and kinematic patterns of running. However, the salient features of the GRFs and the joint angles were present in all conditions, and arm swing did not introduce any major changes in the timing of these data, as indicated by cross correlations. The decision to include arm swing in a computer model will likely need to be made on a case-by-case basis, depending on the design of the study and the accuracy needed to answer the research question.

Download Full-text

Hop-Stabilization Training and Landing Biomechanics in Athletes With Chronic Ankle Instability: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Journal of Athletic Training ◽

10.4085/1062-6050-550-17 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 54 (12) ◽

pp. 1296-1303 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Mohammad Karimizadeh Ardakani ◽

Erik A. Wikstrom ◽

Hooman Minoonejad ◽

Reza Rajabi ◽

Ali Sharifnezhad

Keyword(s):

Lower Extremity ◽

Training Program ◽

Ankle Instability ◽

Control Group ◽

Ground Reaction Forces ◽

Basketball Players ◽

Jump Landing ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Landing Biomechanics ◽

Reaction Forces

Context Hopping exercises are recommended as a functional training tool to prevent lower limb injury, but their effects on lower extremity biomechanics in those with chronic ankle instability (CAI) are unclear. Objective To determine if jump-landing biomechanics change after a hop-stabilization intervention. Design Randomized controlled clinical trial. Setting Research laboratory. Patients or Other Participants Twenty-eight male collegiate basketball players with CAI were divided into 2 groups: hop-training group (age = 22.78 ± 3.09 years, mass = 82.59 ± 9.51 kg, height = 187.96 ± 7.93 cm) and control group (age = 22.57 ± 2.76 years, mass = 78.35 ± 7.02 kg, height = 185.69 ± 7.28 cm). Intervention(s) A 6-week supervised hop-stabilization training program that consisted of 18 training sessions. Main Outcome Measure(s) Lower extremity kinetics and kinematics during a jump-landing task and self-reported function were assessed before and after the 6-week training program. Results The hop-stabilization program resulted in improved self-reported function (P < .05), larger sagittal-plane hip- and knee-flexion angles, and greater ankle dorsiflexion (P < .05) relative to the control group. Reduced frontal-plane joint angles at the hip, knee, and ankle as well as decreased ground reaction forces and a longer time to peak ground reaction forces were observed in the hopping group compared with the control group after the intervention (P < .05). Conclusions The 6-week hop-stabilization training program altered jump-landing biomechanics in male collegiate basketball players with CAI. These results may provide a potential mechanistic explanation for improvements in patient-reported outcomes and reductions in injury risk after ankle-sprain rehabilitation programs that incorporate hop-stabilization exercises.

Download Full-text

Lower extremity stiffness in habitual forefoot strikers during running on different overground surfaces

Acta of Bioengineering and Biomechanics ◽

10.37190/abb-01820-2021-02 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 23 (2) ◽

Author(s):

Ziwei Zeng ◽

Lulu Yin ◽

Wenxing Zhou ◽

Yu Zhang ◽

Jiayi Jiang ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Lower Extremity ◽

Sagittal Plane ◽

Joint Stiffness ◽

Ground Reaction Forces ◽

Factors Affecting ◽

Vertical Stiffness ◽

Synthetic Rubber ◽

Peak Knee ◽

Reaction Forces ◽

Artificial Grass

Purpose: Sports surface is one of the known external factors affecting running performance and injury. To date, we have found no study that examined the lower extremity stiffness in habitual forefoot strikers running on different overground surfaces. Therefore, the objective of this study was to investigate lower extremity stiffness and relevant kinematic adjustments in habitual forefoot strikers while running on different surfaces. Methods: Thirty-one male habitual forefoot strikers were recruited in this study. Runners were instructed to run at a speed of 3.3 m/s (±5%) on three surfaces, named synthetic rubber, concrete, and artificial grass. Results: No significant differences were found in leg stiffness, vertical stiffness, and joint stiffness in the sagittal plane during running on the three surfaces (p > 0.05). Running on artificial grass exerted a greater displacement in knee joint angle than running on synthetic rubber (p = 0.002, 95% CI = 1.52–7.35 degrees) and concrete (p = 0.006, 95% CI = 1.04–7.25 degrees). In the sagittal plane, peak knee moment was lower on concrete than on artificial grass (p = 0.003, 95% CI = 0.11–0.58 Nm/kg), whereas peak ankle moment was lower on synthetic rubber than on concrete (p < 0.001, 95% CI = 0.03–0.07 Nm/kg) and on artificial grass (p < 0.001, 95% CI = 0.02–0.06 Nm/kg). Among the three surfaces, the maximal ground reaction forces on concrete were the lowest (p < 0.05). Conclusions: This study indicated that running surfaces cannot influence lower extremity stiffness in habitual forefoot strikers at current running speed. Kinematic adjustments of knee and ankle, as well as ground reaction forces, may contribute to maintaining similar lower extremity stiffness.

Download Full-text

Changes in Ground Reaction Forces, Joint Mechanics, and Stiffness during Treadmill Running to Fatigue

Applied Sciences ◽

10.3390/app9245493 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 9 (24) ◽

pp. 5493 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Zhen Luo ◽

Xini Zhang ◽

Junqing Wang ◽

Yang Yang ◽

Yongxin Xu ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Lower Extremity ◽

Treadmill Running ◽

Ground Reaction Forces ◽

Joint Mechanics ◽

Soft Landing ◽

Ankle Stiffness ◽

Impact Forces ◽

Reaction Forces ◽

The Impact ◽

Kinematics And Kinetics

Purpose: This study aimed to determine the changes in lower extremity biomechanics during running-induced fatigue intervention. Methods: Fourteen male recreational runners were required to run at 3.33 m/s until they could no longer continue running. Ground reaction forces (GRFs) and marker trajectories were recorded intermittently every 2 min to quantify the impact forces and the lower extremity kinematics and kinetics during the fatiguing run. Blood lactate concentration (BLa) was also collected before and after running. Results: In comparison with the beginning of the run duration, (1) BLa significantly increased immediately after running, 4 min after running, and 9 min after running; (2) no changes were observed in vertical/anterior–posterior GRF and loading rates; (3) the hip joint range of motion (θROM) significantly increased at 33%, 67%, and 100% of the run duration, whereas θROM of the knee joint significantly increased at 67%; (4) no changes were observed in ankle joint kinematics and peak joint moment at the ankle, knee, and hip; and (5) vertical and ankle stiffness decreased at 67% and 100% of the run duration. Conclusion: GRF characteristics did not vary significantly throughout the fatiguing run. However, nonlinear adaptations in lower extremity kinematics and kinetics were observed. In particular, a “soft landing” strategy, achieved by an increased θROM at the hip and knee joints and a decreased vertical and ankle stiffness, was initiated from the mid-stage of a fatiguing run to potentially maintain similar impact forces.

Download Full-text

Differences of ground reaction forces and kinematics of lower extremity according to landing height between flat and normal feet

Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation ◽

10.3233/bmr-2012-0306 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 25 (1) ◽

pp. 21-26 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Jong Sung Chang ◽

Yong Hyun Kwon ◽

Chung Sun Kim ◽

Sang-Ho Ahn ◽

So Hyun Park

Keyword(s):

Lower Extremity ◽

Ground Reaction Forces ◽

Reaction Forces

Download Full-text

Increased Medial Longitudinal Arch Mobility, Lower Extremity Kinematics, and Ground Reaction Forces in High-Arched Runners

Journal of Athletic Training ◽

10.4085/1062-6050-49.3.05 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 49 (3) ◽

pp. 290-296 ◽

Cited By ~ 18

Author(s):

D. S. Blaise Williams ◽

Robin N. Tierney ◽

Robert J. Butler

Keyword(s):

Body Weight ◽

Lower Extremity ◽

Internal Rotation ◽

Ground Reaction Forces ◽

Medial Longitudinal Arch ◽

Arch Height ◽

Tibial Internal Rotation ◽

Longitudinal Arch ◽

Reaction Forces ◽

Vertical Ground

Context: Runners with high medial longitudinal arch structure demonstrate unique kinematics and kinetics that may lead to running injuries. The mobility of the midfoot as measured by the change in arch height is also suspected to play a role in lower extremity function during running. The effect of arch mobility in high-arched runners is an important factor in prescribing footwear, training, and rehabilitating the running athlete after injury. Objective: To examine the effect of medial longitudinal arch mobility on running kinematics, ground reaction forces, and loading rates in high-arched runners. Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting: Human movement research laboratory. Patients or Other Participants: A total of 104 runners were screened for arch height. Runners were then identified as having high arches if the arch height index was greater than 0.5 SD above the mean. Of the runners with high arches, 11 rigid runners with the lowest arch mobility (R) were compared with 8 mobile runners with the highest arch mobility (M). Arch mobility was determined by calculating the left arch height index in all runners. Intervention(s): Three-dimensional motion analysis of running over ground. Main Outcome Measure(s): Rearfoot and tibial angular excursions, eversion-to-tibial internal-rotation ratio, vertical ground reaction forces, and the associated loading rates. Results: Runners with mobile arches exhibited decreased tibial internal-rotation excursion (mobile: 5.6° ± 2.3° versus rigid: 8.0° ± 3.0°), greater eversion-to-tibial internal-rotation ratio (mobile: 2.1 ± 0.8 versus rigid: 1.5 ± 0.5), decreased second peak vertical ground reaction force values (mobile: 2.3 ± 0.2 × body weight versus rigid: 2.4 ± 0.1 × body weight), and decreased vertical loading rate values (mobile: 55.7 ± 14.1 × body weight/s versus rigid: 65.9 ± 11.4 × body weight/s). Conclusions: Based on the results of this study, it appears that runners with high arch structure but differing arch mobility exhibited differences in select lower extremity movement patterns and forces. Future authors should investigate the impact of arch mobility on running-related injuries.

Download Full-text