Literature DB >> 16427168

Comparison of static and dynamic biomechanical measures in military recruits with and without a history of third metatarsal stress fracture.

Sharon J Dixon1, Mark W Creaby, Adrian J Allsopp.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: For Royal Marine recruits in training, the third metatarsal is the most common site for stress fracture. Previous evidence regarding biomechanical factors contributing to metatarsal stress fracture development is conflicting, possibly due to the lack of differentiation between the metatarsals. The present retrospective study compares static anatomical characteristics and dynamic biomechanical variables for Royal Marine recruits with and without a history of third metatarsal stress fracture.
METHODS: Ten Royal Marine recruits with a history of third metatarsal stress fracture were compared with control subjects with no previous stress fracture occurrence. Selected static anatomical variables were measured to describe the ankle and subtalar joints. Peak ankle dorsi-flexion and rearfoot eversion were measured during running. In addition, peak vertical and horizontal ground reaction force variables were compared for the two study groups.
FINDINGS: No significant differences in static anatomical variables were identified between study groups. During running, peak rearfoot eversion was found to occur significantly earlier for the stress fracture group than for their matched controls, suggesting an increase in time spent loading the forefoot. The peak applied resultant horizontal force during the braking phase was directed significantly more laterally for the stress fracture group. In addition, the peak magnitude of resultant horizontal force applied during the propulsion phase was significantly lower for the stress fracture subjects.
INTERPRETATION: The findings of this study highlight the importance of including dynamic biomechanical data when exploring variables associated with the development of third metatarsal stress fracture and indicate that successful interventions to reduce the incidence of this injury are likely to focus on forefoot function during braking and propulsion.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16427168     DOI: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2005.11.009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)        ISSN: 0268-0033            Impact factor:   2.063


  11 in total

Review 1.  Stress fractures: pathophysiology, epidemiology, and risk factors.

Authors:  Stuart J Warden; David B Burr; Peter D Brukner
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 5.096

2.  Isokinetic analysis of ankle and ground reaction forces in runners and triathletes.

Authors:  Natália Mariana Silva Luna; Angelica Castilho Alonso; Guilherme Carlos Brech; Luis Mochizuki; Eduardo Yoshio Nakano; Júlia Maria D'Andrea Greve
Journal:  Clinics (Sao Paulo)       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 2.365

3.  Incidence and Time to Return to Training for Stress Fractures during Military Basic Training.

Authors:  Alexander M Wood; Richard Hales; Andre Keenan; Alexandra Moss; Michael Chapman; Trish Davey; Andrew Nelstrop
Journal:  J Sports Med (Hindawi Publ Corp)       Date:  2014-01-21

4.  Increased vertical impact forces and altered running mechanics with softer midsole shoes.

Authors:  Jennifer Baltich; Christian Maurer; Benno M Nigg
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-04-21       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Ground reaction force metrics are not strongly correlated with tibial bone load when running across speeds and slopes: Implications for science, sport and wearable tech.

Authors:  Emily S Matijevich; Lauren M Branscombe; Leon R Scott; Karl E Zelik
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-01-17       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 6.  Non-Modifiable Risk Factors for Stress Fractures in Military Personnel Undergoing Training: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Grace M Lennox; Patrick M Wood; Ben Schram; Elisa F D Canetti; Vini Simas; Rodney Pope; Robin Orr
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-12-31       Impact factor: 3.390

7.  Risk factors for musculoskeletal injuries in the military: a qualitative systematic review of the literature from the past two decades and a new prioritizing injury model.

Authors:  Stefan Sammito; Vedran Hadzic; Thomas Karakolis; Karen R Kelly; Susan P Proctor; Ainars Stepens; Graham White; Wes O Zimmermann
Journal:  Mil Med Res       Date:  2021-12-10

8.  Reproducibility of a peripheral quantitative computed tomography scan protocol to measure the material properties of the second metatarsal.

Authors:  Elodie Chaplais; David Greene; Anita Hood; Scott Telfer; Verona du Toit; Davinder Singh-Grewal; Joshua Burns; Keith Rome; Daniel J Schiferl; Gordon J Hendry
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2014-07-19       Impact factor: 2.362

Review 9.  Moving in extreme environments: extreme loading; carriage versus distance.

Authors:  Samuel J E Lucas; Jørn W Helge; Uwe H W Schütz; Ralph F Goldman; James D Cotter
Journal:  Extrem Physiol Med       Date:  2016-04-22

10.  Shock Response Spectrum Analysis of Fatigued Runners.

Authors:  Daniel Benjamin; Serge Odof; Boussad Abbès; François Fourchet; Benoit Christiaen; Redha Taïar
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2022-03-18       Impact factor: 3.576

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.