On footedness and ankle’s Dynamic Joint Stiffness relation

T. Atalaia, J. Abrantes
{"title":"On footedness and ankle’s Dynamic Joint Stiffness relation","authors":"T. Atalaia, J. Abrantes","doi":"10.14198/jhse.2019.14.proc4.13","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Our earlier reports suggest no dynamic joint stiffness (DJS) inter-limb differences related to footedness. A different approach to our data was used in this study: first define ankle DJS, then look for inter-limb differences and finally correlate them with the subject’s perceived footedness. Methods: 31 subjects (20 females, 11 males) were assessed for ankle DJS during the stance phase of gait, unilateral triple-jump for distance (TSU) and single-leg hopping (Hop). DJS was obtained by linear models at three stance sub-phases (controlled plantar flexion (CPF); controlled dorsiflexion (CDF); power plantar flexion (PPF)). Footedness assessed by the Lateral Preference Inventory (LPI). Results: Paired samples t-test showed statistical inter-limb differences in ankle DJS at PPF on gait (p< 0.01) and Hop (p< 0.05) tasks. No footedness-DJS correlation was found with exception of the TSU PPF (Pearson’s p<0.05). Descriptive analysis shows that in gait, 55% of the subjects maintained the same stiffer ankle between the CPF and the CDF, 45% keep the same stiffer ankle between CDF and PPF, and only 19% keep the same stiffer ankle along all stance. In TSU and Hop, only 48% and 74%, respectively, keep the same stiffer ankle between CDF and PPF. Conclusion: This approach increased our earlier findings of footedness-DJS correlation, but the results are still low. The variability of DJS along the stance sub-phases between tasks needs more attention. Hop task cold be more adequate for footedness assessment due to a more consistent DJS behaviour along the stance.","PeriodicalId":288462,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Sport and Exercise - 2019 - Spring Conferences of Sports Science","volume":"27 4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Human Sport and Exercise - 2019 - Spring Conferences of Sports Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14198/jhse.2019.14.proc4.13","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Our earlier reports suggest no dynamic joint stiffness (DJS) inter-limb differences related to footedness. A different approach to our data was used in this study: first define ankle DJS, then look for inter-limb differences and finally correlate them with the subject’s perceived footedness. Methods: 31 subjects (20 females, 11 males) were assessed for ankle DJS during the stance phase of gait, unilateral triple-jump for distance (TSU) and single-leg hopping (Hop). DJS was obtained by linear models at three stance sub-phases (controlled plantar flexion (CPF); controlled dorsiflexion (CDF); power plantar flexion (PPF)). Footedness assessed by the Lateral Preference Inventory (LPI). Results: Paired samples t-test showed statistical inter-limb differences in ankle DJS at PPF on gait (p< 0.01) and Hop (p< 0.05) tasks. No footedness-DJS correlation was found with exception of the TSU PPF (Pearson’s p<0.05). Descriptive analysis shows that in gait, 55% of the subjects maintained the same stiffer ankle between the CPF and the CDF, 45% keep the same stiffer ankle between CDF and PPF, and only 19% keep the same stiffer ankle along all stance. In TSU and Hop, only 48% and 74%, respectively, keep the same stiffer ankle between CDF and PPF. Conclusion: This approach increased our earlier findings of footedness-DJS correlation, but the results are still low. The variability of DJS along the stance sub-phases between tasks needs more attention. Hop task cold be more adequate for footedness assessment due to a more consistent DJS behaviour along the stance.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
足行性与踝关节动态关节刚度关系的研究
我们早期的报告表明动态关节刚度(DJS)与足行性无关。本研究采用了一种不同的方法来处理我们的数据:首先定义脚踝的DJS,然后寻找肢体间的差异,最后将它们与受试者感知的脚性联系起来。方法:对31例受试者(女性20例,男性11例)进行步态站立阶段、单侧三跳(TSU)和单腿跳(Hop)的踝关节dj评估。DJS通过三个站姿子阶段的线性模型(可控足底屈曲(CPF);可控背屈;动力跖屈(PPF))。通过横向偏好量表(LPI)评估足性。结果:配对样本t检验显示,PPF时踝关节DJS在步态(p< 0.01)和Hop (p< 0.05)任务上的四肢间差异有统计学意义。除TSU PPF外,足部与djs无相关性(Pearson’s p<0.05)。描述性分析表明,在步态方面,55%的受试者在CPF和CDF之间保持相同的踝关节僵硬,45%的受试者在CDF和PPF之间保持相同的踝关节僵硬,只有19%的受试者在所有站立时保持相同的踝关节僵硬。在TSU和Hop中,分别只有48%和74%的患者在CDF和PPF之间保持相同的踝关节硬度。结论:这种方法增加了我们早期关于足部与dj相关性的发现,但结果仍然很低。dj在任务之间的姿态子阶段的变异性需要更多的关注。跳任务可能更适合脚性评估,因为dj的行为更一致。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Diversity as a starting point for “adapted sport” Case study on the choices to be made to limit the damage of the transitional period Effects induced through the use of physical and motor tests in volleyball Effectiveness of normobaric hypoxia course use in combination with cervical muscle exercise as a means to improve statokinetic stability in alpine skiers Comparison of the seventeen Italian master's degree courses in sports sciences
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1