Differences in Muscle Demand and Joint Contact Forces Between Running and Skipping.

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q4 ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL Journal of Applied Biomechanics Pub Date : 2022-10-20 Print Date: 2022-12-01 DOI:10.1123/jab.2022-0011
Sarah A Roelker, Paul DeVita, John D Willson, Richard R Neptune
{"title":"Differences in Muscle Demand and Joint Contact Forces Between Running and Skipping.","authors":"Sarah A Roelker,&nbsp;Paul DeVita,&nbsp;John D Willson,&nbsp;Richard R Neptune","doi":"10.1123/jab.2022-0011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Skipping has been proposed as a viable cross-training exercise to running due to its lower knee contact forces and higher whole-body energy expenditure. However, how individual muscle forces, energy expenditure, and joint loading are affected by differences in running and skipping mechanics remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to compare individual muscle forces, energy expenditure, and lower extremity joint contact forces between running and skipping using musculoskeletal modeling and simulations of young adults (n = 5) performing running and skipping at 2.5 m·s-1 on an instrumented treadmill. In agreement with previous work, running had greater knee and patella contact forces than skipping which was accompanied by greater knee extensor energetic demand. Conversely, skipping had greater ankle contact forces and required greater energetic demand from the uniarticular ankle plantarflexors. There were no differences in hip contact forces between gaits. These findings further support skipping as a viable alternative to running if the primary goal is to reduce joint loading at the commonly injured patellofemoral joint. However, for those with ankle injuries, skipping may not be a viable alternative due to the increased ankle loads. These findings may help clinicians prescribe activities most appropriate for a patient's individual training or rehabilitation goals.</p>","PeriodicalId":54883,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Biomechanics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Biomechanics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1123/jab.2022-0011","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/12/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Print","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Skipping has been proposed as a viable cross-training exercise to running due to its lower knee contact forces and higher whole-body energy expenditure. However, how individual muscle forces, energy expenditure, and joint loading are affected by differences in running and skipping mechanics remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to compare individual muscle forces, energy expenditure, and lower extremity joint contact forces between running and skipping using musculoskeletal modeling and simulations of young adults (n = 5) performing running and skipping at 2.5 m·s-1 on an instrumented treadmill. In agreement with previous work, running had greater knee and patella contact forces than skipping which was accompanied by greater knee extensor energetic demand. Conversely, skipping had greater ankle contact forces and required greater energetic demand from the uniarticular ankle plantarflexors. There were no differences in hip contact forces between gaits. These findings further support skipping as a viable alternative to running if the primary goal is to reduce joint loading at the commonly injured patellofemoral joint. However, for those with ankle injuries, skipping may not be a viable alternative due to the increased ankle loads. These findings may help clinicians prescribe activities most appropriate for a patient's individual training or rehabilitation goals.

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
跑步和跳绳之间肌肉需求和关节接触力的差异。
跳绳被认为是一种可行的交叉训练,因为它的膝盖接触力较低,全身能量消耗较高。然而,个体肌肉力量、能量消耗和关节负荷如何受到跑步和跳跃力学差异的影响仍不清楚。本研究的目的是通过肌肉骨骼模型和模拟在器械跑步机上以2.5 m·s-1的速度跑步和跳绳的年轻人(n = 5),比较跑步和跳绳之间的个体肌肉力量、能量消耗和下肢关节接触力。与之前的研究一致,跑步比跳绳有更大的膝关节和髌骨接触力,这伴随着更大的膝关节伸肌能量需求。相反,跳绳有更大的踝关节接触力,需要更多的单关节踝关节跖屈肌的能量需求。不同步态之间的髋部接触力没有差异。如果主要目标是减少常见损伤的髌股关节处的关节负荷,这些发现进一步支持跳绳作为跑步的可行替代方案。然而,对于那些脚踝受伤的人来说,跳绳可能不是一个可行的选择,因为脚踝的负荷增加了。这些发现可以帮助临床医生开出最适合患者个人训练或康复目标的活动。
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
Journal of Applied Biomechanics
Journal of Applied Biomechanics 医学-工程:生物医学
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
47
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The mission of the Journal of Applied Biomechanics (JAB) is to disseminate the highest quality peer-reviewed studies that utilize biomechanical strategies to advance the study of human movement. Areas of interest include clinical biomechanics, gait and posture mechanics, musculoskeletal and neuromuscular biomechanics, sport mechanics, and biomechanical modeling. Studies of sport performance that explicitly generalize to broader activities, contribute substantially to fundamental understanding of human motion, or are in a sport that enjoys wide participation, are welcome. Also within the scope of JAB are studies using biomechanical strategies to investigate the structure, control, function, and state (health and disease) of animals.
期刊最新文献
Do Experienced Adolescent Competition Dancers Alter Landing Kinematics and Kinetics for Split Leaps or Center Leaps After Fatigue? Effects of Stroboscopic Goggles on Standing Balance in the Spatiotemporal and Frequency Domains: An Exploratory Study. Relationship Between Supporting Leg Stiffness and Trunk Kinematics of the Kicking Leg During Soccer Kicking. The Effects of Running Foot Strike Manipulation on Pelvic Floor Muscle Activity in Healthy Nulliparous Females. Fatigue-Related Changes in Running Technique and Mechanical Variables After a Maximal Incremental Test in Recreational Runners.
×
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