4.5 Article

Less hip joint loading only during running rather than walking in elderly compared to young adults

Journal

GAIT & POSTURE
Volume 53, Issue -, Pages 155-161

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2017.01.020

Keywords

Osteoporosis; Biomechanics; Exercise; Hip contact forces; Musculoskeletal modeling; Elderly

Funding

  1. Fund for Scientific Research (FWO-Vlaanderen) [G0526512]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Walking and running have been found to increase hip bone mass in postmenopausal women. However, the optimal speed to trigger osteogenesis is still under debate because the exact loading during different speeds is poorly characterized. Moreover, age related differences in gait kinematics/kinetics can potentially result in differences in peak hip loading, making extrapolation of results based on young populations to the elderly misleading. Using integrated 3D motion capture and musculoskeletal modeling, peak hip contact forces (HCFs) were calculated during walking and running from 3 to 9 km/h in 14 female young (21.4 +/- 1.6 years old) and elderly (69.8 +/- 3.4 years old) participants. Peak HCFs were similar during walking in both groups, whereas elderly loaded their hip less than young during running, through reducing their stride length and hip adduction angle at peak loading. Moreover, hip adduction moment was found to best predict peak HCF during impact in walking and running whereas hip extension and external rotation moment can predict the second peak HCF during walking in the elderly and young group respectively. Comparison between same speeds in walking and running revealed that in contrast to young no additional hip loading is imposed during running in elderly. The present study offers an insight into the differences in hip loading profile in postmenopausal women during walking and running at different speeds. Such information is crucial to medical experts that target site-specific bone loading through exercise in elderly populations in order to prevent hip bone loss. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available