Literature DB >> 18359634

Ankle fixation need not increase the energetic cost of human walking.

Matthew T Vanderpool1, Steven H Collins, Arthur D Kuo.   

Abstract

We tested whether the metabolic energy cost of walking with the ankles immobilized can be comparable to normal walking. Immobilization of any lower extremity joint usually causes greater energy expenditure. Fixation of the ankle might be expected to eliminate the work it normally performs, to detrimental effect. But fixation using lightweight boots with curved rocker bottoms can also bring some benefits, so that the overall energetic effect might be quite small. We measured oxygen consumption, kinematics, and ground reaction forces in six (N=6) able-bodied human volunteers walking at 1.25 m/s in three conditions: normal walking in street shoes, walking with ankles immobilized by walking boots, and normally with ankles free but also weighted to match the mass of the walking boots. We estimated metabolic energy expenditure, joint work, and overall work performed on the body center of mass as a function of ankle fixation. Ankle fixation with walking boots caused the total rate of energy expenditure for walking to increase by 4.1% compared to normal (P=0.003), but differed by an insignificant amount (0.4% less, P=0.78) compared to walking with equivalent ankle weight. Compared to normal walking, ankle fixation can reduce ankle torque and work during the stance phase, most notably during late stance. This apparently makes up for the loss of ability to push-off as normal. With a suitably lightweight apparatus and curved rocker bottom surface, loss of ankle motion need not increase energy expenditure for walking.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18359634      PMCID: PMC2703459          DOI: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2008.01.016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gait Posture        ISSN: 0966-6362            Impact factor:   2.840


  25 in total

1.  The effects of rocker sole and SACH heel on kinematics in gait.

Authors:  Wen-Lan Wu; Dieter Rosenbaum; Fong-Chin Su
Journal:  Med Eng Phys       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 2.242

2.  Shoes for the insensitive foot: the effect of a "rocker bottom" shoe modification on plantar pressure distribution.

Authors:  P S Schaff; P R Cavanagh
Journal:  Foot Ankle       Date:  1990-12

3.  Energy cost of walking of amputees: the influence of level of amputation.

Authors:  R L Waters; J Perry; D Antonelli; H Hislop
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1976-01       Impact factor: 5.284

4.  Derivation of formulae used to calculate energy expenditure in man.

Authors:  J M Brockway
Journal:  Hum Nutr Clin Nutr       Date:  1987-11

5.  The effect of immobilization devices on the load distribution under the foot.

Authors:  M J Shereff; A M Bregman; F J Kummer
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1985 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 6.  The energy expenditure of normal and pathologic gait.

Authors:  R L Waters; S Mulroy
Journal:  Gait Posture       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 2.840

7.  Mechanical and metabolic requirements for active lateral stabilization in human walking.

Authors:  J M J Maxwell Donelan; D W David W Shipman; Rodger Kram; A D Arthur D Kuo
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 2.712

8.  Energy costs of walking in lower-extremity plaster casts.

Authors:  R L Waters; J Campbell; L Thomas; L Hugos; P Davis
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1982-07       Impact factor: 5.284

9.  Comparable energy expenditure after arthrodesis of the hip and ankle.

Authors:  R L Waters; G Barnes; T Husserl; L Silver; R Liss
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1988-08       Impact factor: 5.284

10.  Ankle fusion for degenerative arthritis secondary to the collagen diseases.

Authors:  F W Wagner
Journal:  Foot Ankle       Date:  1982 Jul-Aug
View more
  13 in total

1.  Mechanical and energetic consequences of reduced ankle plantar-flexion in human walking.

Authors:  Tzu-wei P Huang; Kenneth A Shorter; Peter G Adamczyk; Arthur D Kuo
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2015-09-18       Impact factor: 3.312

Review 2.  Dynamic principles of gait and their clinical implications.

Authors:  Arthur D Kuo; J Maxwell Donelan
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  2009-12-18

Review 3.  A unified perspective on ankle push-off in human walking.

Authors:  Karl E Zelik; Peter G Adamczyk
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2016-12-01       Impact factor: 3.312

4.  Systematic variation of prosthetic foot spring affects center-of-mass mechanics and metabolic cost during walking.

Authors:  Karl E Zelik; Steven H Collins; Peter G Adamczyk; Ava D Segal; Glenn K Klute; David C Morgenroth; Michael E Hahn; Michael S Orendurff; Joseph M Czerniecki; Arthur D Kuo
Journal:  IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng       Date:  2011-06-23       Impact factor: 3.802

5.  The effects of a controlled energy storage and return prototype prosthetic foot on transtibial amputee ambulation.

Authors:  Ava D Segal; Karl E Zelik; Glenn K Klute; David C Morgenroth; Michael E Hahn; Michael S Orendurff; Peter G Adamczyk; Steven H Collins; Arthur D Kuo; Joseph M Czerniecki
Journal:  Hum Mov Sci       Date:  2011-11-17       Impact factor: 2.161

6.  Effect of rocker shoe radius on oxygen consumption rate in young able-bodied persons.

Authors:  Andrew H Hansen; Charles C Wang
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2011-03-02       Impact factor: 2.712

7.  Mechanical and energetic consequences of rolling foot shape in human walking.

Authors:  Peter G Adamczyk; Arthur D Kuo
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2013-04-11       Impact factor: 3.312

8.  Recycling energy to restore impaired ankle function during human walking.

Authors:  Steven H Collins; Arthur D Kuo
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-02-17       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Prosthetic ankle push-off work reduces metabolic rate but not collision work in non-amputee walking.

Authors:  Joshua M Caputo; Steven H Collins
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2014-12-03       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  Simulating Ideal Assistive Devices to Reduce the Metabolic Cost of Running.

Authors:  Thomas K Uchida; Ajay Seth; Soha Pouya; Christopher L Dembia; Jennifer L Hicks; Scott L Delp
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-09-22       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.