| Literature DB >> 29854000 |
Yi-Jia Lin1, Shih-Chi Lee1, Chao-Chin Chang1, Tsung-Han Liu2, Tzyy-Yuang Shiang2, Wei-Chun Hsu1,3.
Abstract
This study is aimed at determining the effects of midsole thickness on movement characteristic during side cutting movement. Fifteen athletes performed side-step cutting while wearing shoes with varying midsole thicknesses. Temporal-spatial and ground reaction force variables as well as foot and ankle frontal kinematics were used to describe breaking and propulsive movement characteristics and modulation strategies. Regardless of midsole thickness, temporal-spatial variables and breaking and propulsive force during side cutting were statistically unchanged. Significantly greater peaks of ankle inversion and plantarflexion with a thicker sole and greater midtarsal pronation with a thinner sole were observed. Current results demonstrated that hypotheses formed solely based on material testing were insufficient to understand the adaptations in human movement because of the redundancy of the neuromusculoskeletal system. Participants were able to maintain temporal-spatial performance during side cutting while wearing shoes with midsoles of varying thicknesses. Increased pronation for a thinner sole might help reduce the force of impact but might be associated with an increased risk of excessive stress on soft tissue. Increased peak of ankle inversion and plantarflexion for a thicker sole may be unfavorable for the stability of ankle joint. Information provided in human movement testing is crucial for understanding factors associated with movement characteristics and injury and should be considered in the future development of shoe design.Entities:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29854000 PMCID: PMC5966703 DOI: 10.1155/2018/9171502
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Appl Bionics Biomech ISSN: 1176-2322 Impact factor: 1.781
Figure 1GRF curves on the (a) medial, (b) posterior, and (c) vertical directions of the leading stance limb when performing lateral SC for the thin (thick lines), medium (dash lines), and thick (dot lines) midsole during the stance phase. Peak 1 indicates the peak GRF during the early leading stance, and peak 2 indicates the peak GRF during the late leading stance. Comparisons of these peaks and the loading rate of impact peaks between midsole conditions are displayed as bar charts in (d)–(f) for the medial GRF, (g)–(i) for the posterior GRF, and (j)–(l) for the vertical GRF, with corresponding standard deviations as error bars (black bar: the thin midsole, dashed bar: the medium midsole, and dotted bar: the thick midsole).
Temporal-spatial variables and ankle inversion at each of the critical events during side cutting movement for the three midsole thicknesses (thin, medium, and thick).
| Thickness | Thickness effects | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thin | Medium | Thick |
| ||
| Temporal variables | Total leading stance duration (sec) | 0.63 ± 0.13 | 0.60 ± 0.15 | 0.62 ± 0.15 | 0.15 |
| Breaking impulse duration of the leading stance phase (sec) | 0.33 ± 0.13 | 0.30 ± 0.14 | 0.32 ± 0.12 | 0.28 | |
| Propulsive impulse duration of the leading stance phase (sec) | 0.31 ± 0.08 | 0.31 ± 0.07 | 0.31 ± 0.07 | 0.92 | |
| Leading step time (sec) | 0.53 ± 0.07 | 0.55 ± 0.07 | 0.54 ± 0.07 | 0.41 | |
|
| |||||
| Spatial variables | Leading step length (cm) | 138.89 ± 25.19 | 145.67 ± 23.31 | 141.31 ± 26.96 | 0.31 |
|
| |||||
| Ankle inversion | At the beginning of the leading stance phase | 7.82 ± 5.82 | 8.91 ± 4.92 | 11.82 ± 6.55 | 0.016∗ |
| At the end of the leading stance phase | 10.37 ± 5.28 | 11.73 ± 4.81 | 16.27 ± 5.36 | 0.013∗ | |
Note. Values are expressed as means ± SD. p values for comparisons between thin, medium, and thick midsole conditions. ∗p < 0.05 indicates a significant difference.
Figure 2Angular displacement curves of the (a) ankle dorsiflexion (+)/plantarflexion (−), (b) ankle inversion, and (c) midfoot supination (+)/pronation (−) GRF of the leading stance limb when performing lateral side cutting for the thin (thick lines), medium (dash lines), and thick (dot lines) midsoles during the stance phase. The vertical lines indicate the instances when the leading toe is off (T1), the trailing toe is on (T2), the leading heel strikes (T3), and the leading heel is off (T4) the ground. Focusing on the leading stance phase, peak 1 indicates the peak ankle plantarflexion and peak ankle inversion during the early leading stance phase and peak 2 indicates the peak ankle plantarflexion and peak ankle inversion during the late leading stance phase and the “peak” midfoot pronation around the middle of leading stance phases. Comparisons of these peaks among midsole conditions are displayed as bar charts in (d) and (e) for ankle plantarflexion, (f) and (g) for ankle inversion, and (h) for midfoot pronation, with corresponding standard deviations as error bars. With increasing midsole thickness, the right arrow above the graph indicates a statistically significant increasing linear trend and the left arrow indicates a statistically significant decreasing linear trend (p < 0.05) (black bar: the thin midsole, dashed bar: the medium midsole, and dotted bar: the thick midsole).