4.5 Article

Quantitative analysis of human ankle characteristics at different gait phases and speeds for utilizing in ankle-foot prosthetic design

Journal

BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING ONLINE
Volume 13, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

BIOMED CENTRAL LTD
DOI: 10.1186/1475-925X-13-19

Keywords

Ankle biomechanics; Walking; Prosthesis; Power; Ankle-foot mechanisms; Hysteresis; Quasi-stiffness

Funding

  1. UM/MOHE/HIR [D000014-16001]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Ankle characteristics vary in terms of gait phase and speed change. This study aimed to quantify the components of ankle characteristics, including quasi-stiffness and work in different gait phases and at various speeds. Methods: The kinetic and kinematic data of 20 healthy participants were collected during normal gait at four speeds. Stance moment-angle curves were divided into three sub-phases including controlled plantarflexion, controlled dorsiflexion and powered plantarflexion. The slope of the moment-angle curves was quantified as quasi-stiffness. The area under the curves was defined as work. Results: The lowest quasi-stiffness was observed in the controlled plantarflexion. The fitted line to moment-angle curves showed R-2 > 0.8 at controlled dorsiflexion and powered plantarflexion. Quasi-stiffness was significantly different at different speeds (P = 0.00). In the controlled dorsiflexion, the ankle absorbed energy; by comparison, energy was generated in the powered plantarflexion. A negative work value was recorded at slower speeds and a positive value was observed at faster speeds. Ankle peak powers were increased with walking speed (P = 0.00). Conclusions: Our findings suggested that the quasi-stiffness and work of the ankle joint can be regulated at different phases and speeds. These findings may be clinically applicable in the design and development of ankle prosthetic devices that can naturally replicate human walking at various gait speeds.

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