Limits...
The generation of centripetal force when walking in a circle: insight from the distribution of ground reaction forces recorded by plantar insoles.

Turcato AM, Godi M, Giordano A, Schieppati M, Nardone A - J Neuroeng Rehabil (2015)

Bottom Line: During curved walking, a greater loading of the lateral heel occurred for Foot-Out than Foot-In and LIN foot.On the contrary, a smaller lateral loading of the heel was found for Foot-In than LIN foot.At the metatarsal heads, an opposite behaviour was seen, since lateral loading decreased for Foot-Out and increased for Foot-In.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Posture and Movement Laboratory, Division of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Scientific Institute of Veruno, Fondazione Salvatore Maugeri (IRCCS), Veruno, NO, Italy. turcato.anna@gmail.com.

ABSTRACT

Background: Turning involves complex reorientation of the body and is accompanied by asymmetric motion of the lower limbs. We investigated the distribution of the forces under the two feet, and its relation to the trajectory features and body medio-lateral displacement during curved walking.

Methods: Twenty-six healthy young participants walked under three different randomized conditions: in a straight line (LIN), in a circular clockwise path and in a circular counter-clockwise path. Both feet were instrumented with Pedar-X insoles. An accelerometer was fixed to the trunk to measure the medio-lateral inclination of the body. We analyzed walking speed, stance duration as a percent of gait cycle (%GC), the vertical component of the ground reaction force (vGRF) of both feet during the entire stance, and trunk inclination.

Results: Gait speed was faster during LIN than curved walking, but not affected by the direction of the curved trajectory. Trunk inclination was negligible during LIN, while the trunk was inclined toward the center of the path during curved trajectories. Stance duration of LIN foot and foot inside the curved trajectory (Foot-In) was longer than for foot outside the trajectory (Foot-Out). vGRF at heel strike was larger in LIN than in curved walking. At mid-stance, vGRF for both Foot-In and Foot-Out was higher than for LIN foot. At toe off, vGRF for both Foot-In and Foot-Out was lower than for LIN foot; in addition, Foot-In had lower vGRF than Foot-Out. During curved walking, a greater loading of the lateral heel occurred for Foot-Out than Foot-In and LIN foot. On the contrary, a smaller lateral loading of the heel was found for Foot-In than LIN foot. At the metatarsal heads, an opposite behaviour was seen, since lateral loading decreased for Foot-Out and increased for Foot-In.

Conclusions: The lower gait speed during curved walking is shaped by the control of trunk inclination and the production of asymmetric loading of heel and metatarsal heads, hence by the different contribution of the feet in producing the body inclination towards the centre of the trajectory.

No MeSH data available.


Trunk inclination during linear and curved trajectories and its relation to walking speed. A. Trunk inclination during the linear (LIN) and curved trajectories (counter-clockwise, CCW; clockwise, CW). The curved trajectories present a similar but opposite value. B. Relationship between walking speed normalized to height and trunk inclination across subjects. A linear relationship is present between inclination and speed but only during curved trajectories. *, p < 0.05; **, p < 0.005; ***, p < 0.0005.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4325939&req=5

Fig5: Trunk inclination during linear and curved trajectories and its relation to walking speed. A. Trunk inclination during the linear (LIN) and curved trajectories (counter-clockwise, CCW; clockwise, CW). The curved trajectories present a similar but opposite value. B. Relationship between walking speed normalized to height and trunk inclination across subjects. A linear relationship is present between inclination and speed but only during curved trajectories. *, p < 0.05; **, p < 0.005; ***, p < 0.0005.

Mentions: Trunk inclination in the frontal plane was dependent on the trajectory (Figure 5A). During LIN walking, inclination ranged between −1 and +0.9 deg. For curved paths, the trunk was inclined toward the interior of the trajectory: for CCW, it was inclined to the left (negative values), ranging across subjects between −7.6 and −2.1 deg, while for CW it was inclined to the right (positive values), ranging between +0.5 and +7.6 deg. On average, trunk inclination was −0.3 deg ± 0.1, −4.6 deg ± 0.4, and +4.4 deg ± 0.5 during LIN, CCW and CW, respectively. ANOVA showed a significant effect of the trajectories on inclination (F(2,30) = 162.3; p < 0.0001). Inclination values differed from each other for the three trajectories (post-hoc, p < 0.0001).Figure 5


The generation of centripetal force when walking in a circle: insight from the distribution of ground reaction forces recorded by plantar insoles.

Turcato AM, Godi M, Giordano A, Schieppati M, Nardone A - J Neuroeng Rehabil (2015)

Trunk inclination during linear and curved trajectories and its relation to walking speed. A. Trunk inclination during the linear (LIN) and curved trajectories (counter-clockwise, CCW; clockwise, CW). The curved trajectories present a similar but opposite value. B. Relationship between walking speed normalized to height and trunk inclination across subjects. A linear relationship is present between inclination and speed but only during curved trajectories. *, p < 0.05; **, p < 0.005; ***, p < 0.0005.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4325939&req=5

Fig5: Trunk inclination during linear and curved trajectories and its relation to walking speed. A. Trunk inclination during the linear (LIN) and curved trajectories (counter-clockwise, CCW; clockwise, CW). The curved trajectories present a similar but opposite value. B. Relationship between walking speed normalized to height and trunk inclination across subjects. A linear relationship is present between inclination and speed but only during curved trajectories. *, p < 0.05; **, p < 0.005; ***, p < 0.0005.
Mentions: Trunk inclination in the frontal plane was dependent on the trajectory (Figure 5A). During LIN walking, inclination ranged between −1 and +0.9 deg. For curved paths, the trunk was inclined toward the interior of the trajectory: for CCW, it was inclined to the left (negative values), ranging across subjects between −7.6 and −2.1 deg, while for CW it was inclined to the right (positive values), ranging between +0.5 and +7.6 deg. On average, trunk inclination was −0.3 deg ± 0.1, −4.6 deg ± 0.4, and +4.4 deg ± 0.5 during LIN, CCW and CW, respectively. ANOVA showed a significant effect of the trajectories on inclination (F(2,30) = 162.3; p < 0.0001). Inclination values differed from each other for the three trajectories (post-hoc, p < 0.0001).Figure 5

Bottom Line: During curved walking, a greater loading of the lateral heel occurred for Foot-Out than Foot-In and LIN foot.On the contrary, a smaller lateral loading of the heel was found for Foot-In than LIN foot.At the metatarsal heads, an opposite behaviour was seen, since lateral loading decreased for Foot-Out and increased for Foot-In.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Posture and Movement Laboratory, Division of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Scientific Institute of Veruno, Fondazione Salvatore Maugeri (IRCCS), Veruno, NO, Italy. turcato.anna@gmail.com.

ABSTRACT

Background: Turning involves complex reorientation of the body and is accompanied by asymmetric motion of the lower limbs. We investigated the distribution of the forces under the two feet, and its relation to the trajectory features and body medio-lateral displacement during curved walking.

Methods: Twenty-six healthy young participants walked under three different randomized conditions: in a straight line (LIN), in a circular clockwise path and in a circular counter-clockwise path. Both feet were instrumented with Pedar-X insoles. An accelerometer was fixed to the trunk to measure the medio-lateral inclination of the body. We analyzed walking speed, stance duration as a percent of gait cycle (%GC), the vertical component of the ground reaction force (vGRF) of both feet during the entire stance, and trunk inclination.

Results: Gait speed was faster during LIN than curved walking, but not affected by the direction of the curved trajectory. Trunk inclination was negligible during LIN, while the trunk was inclined toward the center of the path during curved trajectories. Stance duration of LIN foot and foot inside the curved trajectory (Foot-In) was longer than for foot outside the trajectory (Foot-Out). vGRF at heel strike was larger in LIN than in curved walking. At mid-stance, vGRF for both Foot-In and Foot-Out was higher than for LIN foot. At toe off, vGRF for both Foot-In and Foot-Out was lower than for LIN foot; in addition, Foot-In had lower vGRF than Foot-Out. During curved walking, a greater loading of the lateral heel occurred for Foot-Out than Foot-In and LIN foot. On the contrary, a smaller lateral loading of the heel was found for Foot-In than LIN foot. At the metatarsal heads, an opposite behaviour was seen, since lateral loading decreased for Foot-Out and increased for Foot-In.

Conclusions: The lower gait speed during curved walking is shaped by the control of trunk inclination and the production of asymmetric loading of heel and metatarsal heads, hence by the different contribution of the feet in producing the body inclination towards the centre of the trajectory.

No MeSH data available.