scholarly journals Effects of Running Surface Stiffness on Three-Segment Foot Kinematics Responses with Different Shod Conditions

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Noor Arifah Azwani Abdul Yamin ◽  
Khairul Salleh Basaruddin ◽  
Ahmad Faizal Salleh ◽  
Mohammad Shahril Salim ◽  
Wan Zuki Azman Wan Muhamad
Keyword(s):  
Plantar Fascia ◽  
Joint Rotation ◽  
Foot Kinematics ◽  
Surface Stiffness ◽  
Flat Base ◽  
Running Shoes ◽  
Stance Time ◽  
Biomechanical Responses ◽  
Artificial Grass ◽  
Male Subjects

Objective. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of surface stiffness on multisegment foot kinematics and temporal parameters during running. Methods. Eighteen male subjects ran on three different surfaces (i.e., concrete, artificial grass, and rubber) in both heeled running shoes (HS) and minimal running shoes (MS). Both these shoes had dissimilar sole profiles. The heeled shoes had a higher sole at the heel, a thick base, and arch support, whereas the minimal shoes had a flat base sole. Indeed, the studied biomechanical parameters responded differently in the different footwear during running. Subjects ran in recreational mode speed while 3D foot kinematics (i.e., joint rotation and peak medial longitudinal arch (MLA) angle) were determined using a motion capture system (Qualysis, Gothenburg, Sweden). Information on stance time and plantar fascia strain (PFS) was also collected. Results. Running on different surface stiffness was found to significantly affect the peak MLA angles and stance times for both HS and MS conditions. However, the results showed that the joint rotation angles were not sensitive to surface stiffness. Also, PFS showed no relationship with surface stiffness, as the results were varied as the surface stiffness was changed. Conclusion. The surface stiffness significantly contributed towards the effects of peak MLA angle and stance time. These findings may enhance the understanding of biomechanical responses on various running surfaces stiffness in different shoe conditions.

scholarly journals The influence of motion control, neutral and cushioned running shoes on foot kinematics

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (sup1) ◽  
pp. S22-S23
Author(s):  
Ben Langley ◽  
Mary Cramp ◽  
Stewart C. Morrison
Keyword(s):  
Motion Control ◽  
Foot Kinematics ◽  
Running Shoes

Does Specific Footwear Facilitate Energy Storage and Return at the Metatarsophalangeal Joint in Running?

2013 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 583-592 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steffen Willwacher ◽  
Manuel König ◽  
Wolfgang Potthast ◽  
Gert-Peter Brüggemann
Keyword(s):  
Carbon Fiber ◽  
Reaction Force ◽  
Metatarsophalangeal Joint ◽  
Bending Stiffness ◽  
Joint Mechanics ◽  
Running Shoes ◽  
Longitudinal Bending ◽  
Bending Behavior ◽  
Male Subjects ◽  
Positive Work

Longitudinal midsole bending stiffness and elasticity are two critical features in the construction of running shoes. Stiff elastic materials (eg, carbon fiber) can be used to alter the midsole bending behavior. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of midsole stiffness and elasticity manipulation on metatarsophalangeal (MTP) joint mechanics during running in 19 male subjects at 3.5 m/s. Midsole bending stiffness and elasticity were modified by means of carbon fiber insoles of varying thickness. Stiffening the shoe structures around the MTP joint caused a shift of the point of force application toward the front edge of the shoe-ground interface. Negative work was significantly reduced for the stiffest shoe condition and at the same time a significant increase of positive work at the MTP joint was found. It seems plausible that the increase in positive work originates from the reutilization of elastic energy that was stored inside the passive elastic structures of the shoe and toe flexing muscle tendon units. Further, an increase in midsole longitudinal bending stiffness seems to alter the working conditions and mechanical power generation capacities of the MTP plantar flexing muscle tendon units by changing ground reaction force leverage and MTP angular velocity.

scholarly journals The influence of running shoes on inter-segmental foot kinematics

2016 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 17
Author(s):  
B. Langley ◽  
M. Cramp ◽  
S. Morrison
Keyword(s):  
Foot Kinematics ◽  
Running Shoes

Effects of plantar fascia stiffness on the biomechanical responses of the ankle–foot complex

2004 ◽  
Vol 19 (8) ◽  
pp. 839-846 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason Tak-Man Cheung ◽  
Ming Zhang ◽  
Kai-Nan An
Keyword(s):  
Plantar Fascia ◽  
Biomechanical Responses

Foot Orientation and Lower Limb Kinematics During Running

1997 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 157-162 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabrice Viale ◽  
Alain Belli ◽  
Jean-Rene Lacour ◽  
Philippe Freychat
Keyword(s):  
Lower Limb ◽  
Interindividual Variability ◽  
Ankle Dorsiflexion ◽  
Pressure Measurements ◽  
Foot Kinematics ◽  
Limb Stiffness ◽  
Limb Kinematics ◽  
Stiffness Control ◽  
Male Subjects ◽  
Lower Limb Kinematics

The purpose of this study was to determine the possible mechanisms explaining the interindividual differences in foot orientations observed during running. Foot orientations, foot pressures, and ankle dorsiflexion and plantarflexion were simultaneously recorded on 12 male subjects running barefooted at 3.9 ± 0.6 m · sec−1. The abduction of the forefoot was significantly related to the ankle dorsiflexion and plantarflexion velocities ( P < 0.01 and P < 0.05, respectively). Because it was not possible, from pressure measurements, to determine differences in foot lever arm of runners, it is suggested that the interindividual variability of foot kinematics could not be explained by Bojsen-Moller's model, but could reflect differences in the lower limb stiffness control.

Energetics and mechanics of human running on surfaces of different stiffnesses

2002 ◽  
Vol 92 (2) ◽  
pp. 469-478 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy E. Kerdok ◽  
Andrew A. Biewener ◽  
Thomas A. McMahon ◽  
Peter G. Weyand ◽  
Hugh M. Herr
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Force ◽  
Force Plate ◽  
Metabolic Cost ◽  
Running Economy ◽  
Leg Length ◽  
Kinematic Data ◽  
Surface Stiffness ◽  
Leg Stiffness ◽  
Compliant Surfaces ◽  
Male Subjects

Mammals use the elastic components in their legs (principally tendons, ligaments, and muscles) to run economically, while maintaining consistent support mechanics across various surfaces. To examine how leg stiffness and metabolic cost are affected by changes in substrate stiffness, we built experimental platforms with adjustable stiffness to fit on a force-plate-fitted treadmill. Eight male subjects [mean body mass: 74.4 ± 7.1 (SD) kg; leg length: 0.96 ± 0.05 m] ran at 3.7 m/s over five different surface stiffnesses (75.4, 97.5, 216.8, 454.2, and 945.7 kN/m). Metabolic, ground-reaction force, and kinematic data were collected. The 12.5-fold decrease in surface stiffness resulted in a 12% decrease in the runner's metabolic rate and a 29% increase in their leg stiffness. The runner's support mechanics remained essentially unchanged. These results indicate that surface stiffness affects running economy without affecting running support mechanics. We postulate that an increased energy rebound from the compliant surfaces studied contributes to the enhanced running economy.

scholarly journals The influence of running shoes on inter-segmental foot kinematics

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 83-93 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben Langley ◽  
Mary Cramp ◽  
Stewart C. Morrison
Keyword(s):  
Foot Kinematics ◽  
Running Shoes

Differences In Foot Kinematics Between Forefoot Strikers In Minimalist And Conventional Running Shoes

2019 ◽  
Vol 51 (Supplement) ◽  
pp. 774-775
Author(s):  
Tryntsje Fokkema ◽  
Jereme Outerleys ◽  
Alessandra Bento Matias ◽  
Adam C. Clansey ◽  
Irene S. Davis
Keyword(s):  
Foot Kinematics ◽  
Running Shoes

The Effects of Walking Speed on Multisegment Foot Kinematics in Adults

2009 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 377-386 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kirsten Tulchin ◽  
Michael Orendurff ◽  
Stephen Adolfsen ◽  
Lori Karol
Keyword(s):  
Rigid Body ◽  
Walking Speed ◽  
Sagittal Plane ◽  
Plantar Flexion ◽  
Clinical Intervention ◽  
Foot Kinematics ◽  
Ankle Motion ◽  
Ankle Kinematics ◽  
Foot Model ◽  
Stance Time

Multisegment foot models provide researchers more-detailed information regarding foot mechanics compared with single rigid body foot models. Previous work has shown that walking speed significantly affects sagittal plane ankle motion. It is important to distinguish changes in intersegment foot mechanics following treatment that are due to clinical intervention versus those due to walking speed alone. Foot and ankle kinematics were collected on 24 adults walking at 5 speeds. Significant differences were seen at the ankle using a single rigid body foot model, as well as at the hindfoot and forefoot using a multisegment foot model, with all motions exhibiting a shift toward plantar flexion and decreased stance time with increasing speed. When evaluating foot mechanics using a multisegment foot model across groups or conducting intrasubject comparison over time/treatments, it is imperative that walking speed be accounted for or controlled.

The Effects of Orthotic Intervention on Multisegment Foot Kinematics and Plantar Fascia Strain in Recreational Runners

2015 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 28-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Sinclair ◽  
J. Isherwood ◽  
P.J. Taylor
Keyword(s):  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Stance Phase ◽  
Plantar Fascia ◽  
Transverse Plane ◽  
Foot Orthoses ◽  
Foot Kinematics ◽  
Common Complaint ◽  
Running Injuries ◽  
Chronic Injuries ◽  
Recreational Runners

Chronic injuries are a common complaint in recreational runners. Foot orthoses have been shown to be effective for the treatment of running injuries but their mechanical effects are still not well understood. This study aims to examine the influence of orthotic intervention on multisegment foot kinematics and plantar fascia strain during running. Fifteen male participants ran at 4.0 m·s−1 with and without orthotics. Multisegment foot kinematics and plantar fascia strain were obtained during the stance phase and contrasted using paired t tests. Relative coronal plane range of motion of the midfoot relative to the rearfoot was significantly reduced with orthotics (1.0°) compared to without (2.2°). Similarly, relative transverse plane range of motion was significantly lower with orthotics (1.1°) compared to without (1.8°). Plantar fascia strain did not differ significantly between orthotic (7.1) and nonorthotic (7.1) conditions. This study shows that although orthotics did not serve to reduce plantar fascia strain, they are able to mediate reductions in coronal and transverse plane rotations of the midfoot.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document