足行性与踝关节动态关节刚度关系的研究

T. Atalaia, J. Abrantes
{"title":"足行性与踝关节动态关节刚度关系的研究","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":"{\"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}","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

摘要

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。
On footedness and ankle’s Dynamic Joint Stiffness relation
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.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信