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

2009 ◽  
Vol 131 (12) ◽  
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.

scholarly journals Abdominal Bracing Increases Ground Reaction Forces and Reduces Knee and Hip Flexion During Landing

2016 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
pp. 286-292 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amity Campbell ◽  
Kevin Kemp-Smith ◽  
Peter O'Sullivan ◽  
Leon Straker
Keyword(s):  
Ground Reaction Forces ◽  
Reaction Forces ◽  
Hip Flexion

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

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (14) ◽  
pp. 1629-1634
Author(s):  
Wing-Kai Lam ◽  
Lok-Yee Pak ◽  
Charis King-Wai Wong ◽  
Mohammad Farhan Tan ◽  
Sang-Kyoon Park ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Ground Reaction Forces ◽  
Reaction Forces ◽  
Arch Support

scholarly journals Characteristics of Autocorrelation Structure of Lower Extremity Functional Laterality in Disturbed and Undisturbed Bipedal Upright Stance

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacek Stodółka ◽  
Weronika Stodółka ◽  
Jarosław Gambal ◽  
Tom Raunig
Keyword(s):  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Autocorrelation Function ◽  
Human Mobility ◽  
Time Frame ◽  
Standing Position ◽  
Ground Reaction Forces ◽  
Upright Stance ◽  
Functional Laterality ◽  
Eyes Open ◽  
Reaction Forces

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

Dynamic-joint-strength-based two-dimensional symmetric maximum weight-lifting simulation: Model development and validation

2020 ◽  
Vol 234 (7) ◽  
pp. 660-673
Author(s):  
Ritwik Rakshit ◽  
Yujiang Xiang ◽  
James Yang
Keyword(s):  
Joint Strength ◽  
Reaction Force ◽  
Weight Lifting ◽  
Ground Reaction Forces ◽  
Two Dimensional ◽  
Joint Angles ◽  
Maximum Weight ◽  
Strength Based ◽  
Optimization Formulation ◽  
Reaction Forces

This article presents an optimization formulation and experimental validation of a dynamic-joint-strength-based two-dimensional symmetric maximum weight-lifting simulation. Dynamic joint strength (the net moment capacity as a function of joint angle and angular velocity), as presented in the literature, is adopted in the optimization formulation to predict the symmetric maximum lifting weight and corresponding motion. Nineteen participants were recruited to perform a maximum-weight-box-lifting task in the laboratory, and kinetic and kinematic data including motion and ground reaction forces were collected using a motion capture system and force plates, respectively. For each individual, the predicted spine, shoulder, elbow, hip, knee, and ankle joint angles, as well as vertical and horizontal ground reaction force and box weight, were compared with the experimental data. Both root-mean-square error and Pearson’s correlation coefficient ( r) were used for the validation. The results show that the proposed two-dimensional optimization-based motion prediction formulation is able to accurately predict all joint angles, box weights, and vertical ground reaction forces, but not horizontal ground reaction forces.

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

2019 ◽  
Vol 54 (12) ◽  
pp. 1296-1303 ◽  
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 &lt; .05), larger sagittal-plane hip- and knee-flexion angles, and greater ankle dorsiflexion (P &lt; .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 &lt; .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.

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

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.

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

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (24) ◽  
pp. 5493 ◽  
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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document