4.5 Article

Kinematic correlates of walking cadence in the foot

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOMECHANICS
卷 43, 期 12, 页码 2425-2433

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2010.04.015

关键词

Multisegment foot kinematics; Joints of the foot; Motion analysis

资金

  1. Anatomical Society of Great Britain and Ireland
  2. NERC [NE/H004246/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  3. Natural Environment Research Council [NE/H004246/1] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Evidence has frequently been reported of modifications in gait patterns within the lower limb related to the cadence of walking. Most reports have concerned relationships between cadence and kinematic and the kinetic changes occurring in the main joints and muscles of the lower limb as a whole. The aim of the present study was to assess whether significant changes are also measurable in kinematics of the foot segments. An existing 15 marker-set protocol allowed a four-segment foot and shank model to be defined for relative rotations between the segments to be calculated. Stereophotogrammetry was employed to record marker position data from ten subjects walking at three cadences. The slow- and normal cadence datasets showed similar profiles of joint rotation in three anatomical planes, but significant differences were found between these and the fast cadence. At all joints, frame-by-frame statistical analysis revealed increased dorsiflexion from heel-strike to midstance (p < 0.05) and increased plantarflexion from rnidstance to toe-off (p < 0.05) with increasing cadence. From foot-flat to heel-rise, the fast cadence kinematic data showed a decreased range of motion in the sagittal-plane between forefoot and rearfoot (3.2 degrees +/- 1.2 degrees at slow cadence: 2.0 degrees +/- 0.8 degrees at fast cadence; p < 0.05). The cadences imposed and the multisegment protocol revealed significant kinematic changes in the joints of the foot during barefoot walking. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据