Limits...
Dynamic loading and kinematics analysis of vertical jump based on different forefoot morphology

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

Purpose: This study examined differences in ankle motion and plantar pressure between habitually barefoot male (HBM) and habitually shod male (HSM) during vertical jump.

Methods: Eighteen habitually barefoot males and twenty habitually shod males volunteered to join the test. Distance between hallux and second toe was measured with Easy-Foot-Scan. Plantar pressure and ankle kinematics were measured with EMED force platform and Vicon motion analysis system respectively. T test was taken to analyse the significant differences using Stata 12.0 software.

Results: The distance between hallux and other toes in HBM was greater than it in HSM. HBM showed larger plantar loading under hallux and medial forefoot, while HSM showed lager plantar loading under medial and central forefoot. HBM had smaller ankle plantarflexion, eversion and external rotation than HSM.

Conclusion: Findings of this study provide basic information for further studies on different hallux/toe function in motion control between habitually shod and barefoot populations.

No MeSH data available.


Marker set of three-dimensional kinematic data collection (a = side, b = front, c = rear)
© Copyright Policy - OpenAccess
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC5120166&req=5

Fig2: Marker set of three-dimensional kinematic data collection (a = side, b = front, c = rear)

Mentions: An 8-camera Vicon motion analysis system (Oxford Metrics Ltd., Oxford, UK) was used to collect three-dimensional kinematic data at a frequency of 200 Hz. Participants were required to wear tight shorts. 16 reflective points (diameter 14 mm) were attached on different key locations of right and left lower extremity respectively including anterior–superior iliac spine, posterior–superior iliac spine, lateral mid-thigh, lateral knee, lateral mid-shank, lateral malleolus, second metatarsal head and calcaneus (Fig. 2). Kinetic data were recorded at 50 Hz using an EMED pressure plate (Novel, Germany). All participants were asked to land with forefoot region with right foot on the force plate. The forefoot region was divided into five anatomical parts: medial forefoot (MF), central forefoot (CF), lateral forefoot (LF), hallux (H), other toes (OT) (Fig. 1c). Peak pressure, contact area and pressure–time integral were used to analyse the difference between participants during take-off and landing phase.Fig. 2


Dynamic loading and kinematics analysis of vertical jump based on different forefoot morphology
Marker set of three-dimensional kinematic data collection (a = side, b = front, c = rear)
© Copyright Policy - OpenAccess
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC5120166&req=5

Fig2: Marker set of three-dimensional kinematic data collection (a = side, b = front, c = rear)
Mentions: An 8-camera Vicon motion analysis system (Oxford Metrics Ltd., Oxford, UK) was used to collect three-dimensional kinematic data at a frequency of 200 Hz. Participants were required to wear tight shorts. 16 reflective points (diameter 14 mm) were attached on different key locations of right and left lower extremity respectively including anterior–superior iliac spine, posterior–superior iliac spine, lateral mid-thigh, lateral knee, lateral mid-shank, lateral malleolus, second metatarsal head and calcaneus (Fig. 2). Kinetic data were recorded at 50 Hz using an EMED pressure plate (Novel, Germany). All participants were asked to land with forefoot region with right foot on the force plate. The forefoot region was divided into five anatomical parts: medial forefoot (MF), central forefoot (CF), lateral forefoot (LF), hallux (H), other toes (OT) (Fig. 1c). Peak pressure, contact area and pressure–time integral were used to analyse the difference between participants during take-off and landing phase.Fig. 2

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

Purpose: This study examined differences in ankle motion and plantar pressure between habitually barefoot male (HBM) and habitually shod male (HSM) during vertical jump.

Methods: Eighteen habitually barefoot males and twenty habitually shod males volunteered to join the test. Distance between hallux and second toe was measured with Easy-Foot-Scan. Plantar pressure and ankle kinematics were measured with EMED force platform and Vicon motion analysis system respectively. T test was taken to analyse the significant differences using Stata 12.0 software.

Results: The distance between hallux and other toes in HBM was greater than it in HSM. HBM showed larger plantar loading under hallux and medial forefoot, while HSM showed lager plantar loading under medial and central forefoot. HBM had smaller ankle plantarflexion, eversion and external rotation than HSM.

Conclusion: Findings of this study provide basic information for further studies on different hallux/toe function in motion control between habitually shod and barefoot populations.

No MeSH data available.