Michael J. Rose , Will Flanagan , Brandon T. Peterson , Paige K. Steffler , Brandon T. Tran , Lisa Su , Rachel Gehlhar Humann , Tyler R. Clites
{"title":"踝关节活动度对下肢步态生物力学的影响","authors":"Michael J. Rose , Will Flanagan , Brandon T. Peterson , Paige K. Steffler , Brandon T. Tran , Lisa Su , Rachel Gehlhar Humann , Tyler R. Clites","doi":"10.1016/j.jbiomech.2025.112811","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Movement at the ankle joint serves several purposes during unimpaired locomotion, including stabilization and propulsion. While the healthy ankle can achieve 71°range of plantar/dorsiflexion, only about 30°is used in level-ground walking. Little is known about how gait is affected by isolated limitation of ankle range of motion (RoM) using end-range hard stops. To study this, we developed a simple exoskeleton that restricts ankle range of motion and evaluated the impact of this exoskeleton during level-ground treadmill walking at two speeds, in ten young adults with no ankle pathology. We found that even with 30°range of motion (±15°), significant hard-stop contact occurred compared to when there was no restricted motion, and that individuals did not adjust their gait to avoid contact in this condition. Hard-stop contact time was greater for conditions with less permitted motion, but we did not find significant differences in global kinematic asymmetry at any joint except the ankle, and only in comparisons of other conditions against simulated fusion (<span><math><mrow><mi>p</mi><mo><</mo><mn>0</mn><mo>.</mo><mn>02</mn></mrow></math></span> for all comparisons); providing even ±10°at the ankle did not lead us to observe significant differences in kinematic asymmetry. We also observed significant changes to ankle positive work at RoMs lower than ±15°(<span><math><mrow><mi>p</mi><mo><</mo><mn>0</mn><mo>.</mo><mn>03</mn></mrow></math></span> for all comparisons), but we did not observe significant changes in net work over the gait cycle at any other joint of the lower limb in any conditions except simulated fusion. These results suggest that hard-stop contact does not disturb gait enough for users to adapt to gait strategies that avoided contact, and that ankle range of motion can be restricted in level-ground walking without causing significant differences in gait kinematics and joint work.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":15168,"journal":{"name":"Journal of biomechanics","volume":"189 ","pages":"Article 112811"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Impact of ankle range of motion on lower-limb gait biomechanics\",\"authors\":\"Michael J. Rose , Will Flanagan , Brandon T. Peterson , Paige K. Steffler , Brandon T. Tran , Lisa Su , Rachel Gehlhar Humann , Tyler R. Clites\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jbiomech.2025.112811\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Movement at the ankle joint serves several purposes during unimpaired locomotion, including stabilization and propulsion. While the healthy ankle can achieve 71°range of plantar/dorsiflexion, only about 30°is used in level-ground walking. Little is known about how gait is affected by isolated limitation of ankle range of motion (RoM) using end-range hard stops. To study this, we developed a simple exoskeleton that restricts ankle range of motion and evaluated the impact of this exoskeleton during level-ground treadmill walking at two speeds, in ten young adults with no ankle pathology. We found that even with 30°range of motion (±15°), significant hard-stop contact occurred compared to when there was no restricted motion, and that individuals did not adjust their gait to avoid contact in this condition. Hard-stop contact time was greater for conditions with less permitted motion, but we did not find significant differences in global kinematic asymmetry at any joint except the ankle, and only in comparisons of other conditions against simulated fusion (<span><math><mrow><mi>p</mi><mo><</mo><mn>0</mn><mo>.</mo><mn>02</mn></mrow></math></span> for all comparisons); providing even ±10°at the ankle did not lead us to observe significant differences in kinematic asymmetry. We also observed significant changes to ankle positive work at RoMs lower than ±15°(<span><math><mrow><mi>p</mi><mo><</mo><mn>0</mn><mo>.</mo><mn>03</mn></mrow></math></span> for all comparisons), but we did not observe significant changes in net work over the gait cycle at any other joint of the lower limb in any conditions except simulated fusion. These results suggest that hard-stop contact does not disturb gait enough for users to adapt to gait strategies that avoided contact, and that ankle range of motion can be restricted in level-ground walking without causing significant differences in gait kinematics and joint work.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15168,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of biomechanics\",\"volume\":\"189 \",\"pages\":\"Article 112811\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of biomechanics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021929025003239\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOPHYSICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of biomechanics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021929025003239","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Impact of ankle range of motion on lower-limb gait biomechanics
Movement at the ankle joint serves several purposes during unimpaired locomotion, including stabilization and propulsion. While the healthy ankle can achieve 71°range of plantar/dorsiflexion, only about 30°is used in level-ground walking. Little is known about how gait is affected by isolated limitation of ankle range of motion (RoM) using end-range hard stops. To study this, we developed a simple exoskeleton that restricts ankle range of motion and evaluated the impact of this exoskeleton during level-ground treadmill walking at two speeds, in ten young adults with no ankle pathology. We found that even with 30°range of motion (±15°), significant hard-stop contact occurred compared to when there was no restricted motion, and that individuals did not adjust their gait to avoid contact in this condition. Hard-stop contact time was greater for conditions with less permitted motion, but we did not find significant differences in global kinematic asymmetry at any joint except the ankle, and only in comparisons of other conditions against simulated fusion ( for all comparisons); providing even ±10°at the ankle did not lead us to observe significant differences in kinematic asymmetry. We also observed significant changes to ankle positive work at RoMs lower than ±15°( for all comparisons), but we did not observe significant changes in net work over the gait cycle at any other joint of the lower limb in any conditions except simulated fusion. These results suggest that hard-stop contact does not disturb gait enough for users to adapt to gait strategies that avoided contact, and that ankle range of motion can be restricted in level-ground walking without causing significant differences in gait kinematics and joint work.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Biomechanics publishes reports of original and substantial findings using the principles of mechanics to explore biological problems. Analytical, as well as experimental papers may be submitted, and the journal accepts original articles, surveys and perspective articles (usually by Editorial invitation only), book reviews and letters to the Editor. The criteria for acceptance of manuscripts include excellence, novelty, significance, clarity, conciseness and interest to the readership.
Papers published in the journal may cover a wide range of topics in biomechanics, including, but not limited to:
-Fundamental Topics - Biomechanics of the musculoskeletal, cardiovascular, and respiratory systems, mechanics of hard and soft tissues, biofluid mechanics, mechanics of prostheses and implant-tissue interfaces, mechanics of cells.
-Cardiovascular and Respiratory Biomechanics - Mechanics of blood-flow, air-flow, mechanics of the soft tissues, flow-tissue or flow-prosthesis interactions.
-Cell Biomechanics - Biomechanic analyses of cells, membranes and sub-cellular structures; the relationship of the mechanical environment to cell and tissue response.
-Dental Biomechanics - Design and analysis of dental tissues and prostheses, mechanics of chewing.
-Functional Tissue Engineering - The role of biomechanical factors in engineered tissue replacements and regenerative medicine.
-Injury Biomechanics - Mechanics of impact and trauma, dynamics of man-machine interaction.
-Molecular Biomechanics - Mechanical analyses of biomolecules.
-Orthopedic Biomechanics - Mechanics of fracture and fracture fixation, mechanics of implants and implant fixation, mechanics of bones and joints, wear of natural and artificial joints.
-Rehabilitation Biomechanics - Analyses of gait, mechanics of prosthetics and orthotics.
-Sports Biomechanics - Mechanical analyses of sports performance.