Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Body borne loads impact walk-to-run and running biomechanics.
Gait Posture. 2014; 40(1):237-42.GP

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to perform a biomechanics-based assessment of body borne load during the walk-to-run transition and steady-state running because historical research has limited load carriage assessment to prolonged walking. Fifteen male military personnel had trunk and lower limb biomechanics examined during these locomotor tasks with three different load configurations (light, ∼6 kg, medium, ∼20 kg, and heavy, ∼40 kg). Subject-based means of the dependent variables were submitted to repeated measures ANOVA to test the effects of load configuration. During the walk-to-run transition, the hip decreased (P=0.001) and knee increased (P=0.004) their contribution to joint power with the addition of load. Additionally, greater peak trunk (P=0.001), hip (P=0.001), and knee flexion (P<0.001) moments and trunk flexion (P<0.001) angle, and reduced hip (P=0.001) and knee flexion (P=0.001) posture were evident during the loaded walk-to-run transition. Body borne load had no significant effect (P>0.05) on distribution of lower limb joint power during steady-state running, but increased peak trunk (P<0.001), hip (P=0.001), and knee (P=0.001) flexion moments, and trunk flexion (P<0.001) posture were evident. During the walk-to-run transition the load carrier may move joint power production distally down the kinetic chain and adopt biomechanical profiles to maintain performance of the task. The load carrier, however, may not adopt lower limb kinematic adaptations necessary to shift joint power distribution during steady-state running, despite exhibiting potentially detrimental larger lower limb joint loads. As such, further study appears needed to determine how load carriage impairs maximal locomotor performance.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (ORISE), Belcamp, MD, USA; U.S. Army Natick Soldier Research, Development and Engineering Center, Natick, MA, USA. Electronic address: tyler.n.brown4.ctr@mail.mil.U.S. Army Natick Soldier Research, Development and Engineering Center, Natick, MA, USA.U.S. Army Natick Soldier Research, Development and Engineering Center, Natick, MA, USA.U.S. Army Natick Soldier Research, Development and Engineering Center, Natick, MA, USA.U.S. Army Natick Soldier Research, Development and Engineering Center, Natick, MA, USA.

Pub Type(s)

Clinical Trial
Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

24794647

Citation

Brown, T N., et al. "Body Borne Loads Impact Walk-to-run and Running Biomechanics." Gait & Posture, vol. 40, no. 1, 2014, pp. 237-42.
Brown TN, O'Donovan M, Hasselquist L, et al. Body borne loads impact walk-to-run and running biomechanics. Gait Posture. 2014;40(1):237-42.
Brown, T. N., O'Donovan, M., Hasselquist, L., Corner, B. D., & Schiffman, J. M. (2014). Body borne loads impact walk-to-run and running biomechanics. Gait & Posture, 40(1), 237-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2014.04.001
Brown TN, et al. Body Borne Loads Impact Walk-to-run and Running Biomechanics. Gait Posture. 2014;40(1):237-42. PubMed PMID: 24794647.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Body borne loads impact walk-to-run and running biomechanics. AU - Brown,T N, AU - O'Donovan,M, AU - Hasselquist,L, AU - Corner,B D, AU - Schiffman,J M, Y1 - 2014/04/13/ PY - 2013/09/18/received PY - 2014/03/29/revised PY - 2014/04/01/accepted PY - 2014/5/6/entrez PY - 2014/5/6/pubmed PY - 2015/8/22/medline KW - Load carriage KW - Locomotion KW - Lower limb biomechanics KW - Mechanical work SP - 237 EP - 42 JF - Gait & posture JO - Gait Posture VL - 40 IS - 1 N2 - The purpose of this study was to perform a biomechanics-based assessment of body borne load during the walk-to-run transition and steady-state running because historical research has limited load carriage assessment to prolonged walking. Fifteen male military personnel had trunk and lower limb biomechanics examined during these locomotor tasks with three different load configurations (light, ∼6 kg, medium, ∼20 kg, and heavy, ∼40 kg). Subject-based means of the dependent variables were submitted to repeated measures ANOVA to test the effects of load configuration. During the walk-to-run transition, the hip decreased (P=0.001) and knee increased (P=0.004) their contribution to joint power with the addition of load. Additionally, greater peak trunk (P=0.001), hip (P=0.001), and knee flexion (P<0.001) moments and trunk flexion (P<0.001) angle, and reduced hip (P=0.001) and knee flexion (P=0.001) posture were evident during the loaded walk-to-run transition. Body borne load had no significant effect (P>0.05) on distribution of lower limb joint power during steady-state running, but increased peak trunk (P<0.001), hip (P=0.001), and knee (P=0.001) flexion moments, and trunk flexion (P<0.001) posture were evident. During the walk-to-run transition the load carrier may move joint power production distally down the kinetic chain and adopt biomechanical profiles to maintain performance of the task. The load carrier, however, may not adopt lower limb kinematic adaptations necessary to shift joint power distribution during steady-state running, despite exhibiting potentially detrimental larger lower limb joint loads. As such, further study appears needed to determine how load carriage impairs maximal locomotor performance. SN - 1879-2219 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/24794647/Body_borne_loads_impact_walk_to_run_and_running_biomechanics_ DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -