Literature DB >> 33422727

Healthy ankle and hindfoot kinematics during gait: Sex differences, asymmetry and coupled motion revealed through dynamic biplane radiography.

Shumeng Yang1, Stephen P Canton2, MaCalus V Hogan3, William Anderst4.   

Abstract

The aims of this study were to compare male versus female and dominant versus non-dominant kinematics in the ankle and hindfoot, and to characterize coupled motion between the subtalar and tibiotalar joints during the support phase of gait. Twenty healthy adults walked on a laboratory walkway while synchronized biplane radiographs of the ankle and hindfoot were collected at 100 frames/s. A validated tracking technique was used to measure tibiotalar and subtalar kinematics. Differences between male and female range of motion (ROM) were observed only in tibiotalar (AP and ML) and subtalar (ML) translation (all differences<1 mm and all p < 0.04). Statistical parametric mapping identified differences between kinematics waveforms of males and females in tibiotalar translation (AP and ML) and eversion, and subtalar ML translation. No differences between dominant and non-dominant sides were observed in ROM or kinematics waveforms. The average absolute side-to-side difference in the kinematics waveforms was 4.1° and 1.5 mm or less for all rotations and translations, respectively. Tibiotalar plantarflexion was coupled to subtalar inversion and eversion during the impact and push-off phases of stance (r = 0.90 and r = 0.87, respectively). This data may serve as a guide for evaluating ankle kinematics waveforms, ROM, symmetry, and restoration of healthy coupled motion after surgical intervention or rehabilitation. The observed kinematics differences between males and females may predispose females to higher rates of ankle and knee injury and suggest sex-dependent ankle reconstruction techniques may be beneficial.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Ankle; Dynamic biplane radiography; Hindfoot; Statistical parametric mapping; Symmetry

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33422727      PMCID: PMC7878402          DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2020.110220

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomech        ISSN: 0021-9290            Impact factor:   2.712


  36 in total

1.  Generalized n-dimensional biomechanical field analysis using statistical parametric mapping.

Authors:  Todd C Pataky
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2010-07-20       Impact factor: 2.712

2.  Invasive in vivo measurement of rear-, mid- and forefoot motion during walking.

Authors:  P Lundgren; C Nester; A Liu; A Arndt; R Jones; A Stacoff; P Wolf; A Lundberg
Journal:  Gait Posture       Date:  2007-12-21       Impact factor: 2.840

3.  Normative rearfoot motion during barefoot and shod walking using biplane fluoroscopy.

Authors:  Kevin J Campbell; Katharine J Wilson; Robert F LaPrade; Thomas O Clanton
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-06-06       Impact factor: 4.342

4.  In Vivo Kinematics of the Tibiotalar and Subtalar Joints in Asymptomatic Subjects: A High-Speed Dual Fluoroscopy Study.

Authors:  Koren E Roach; Bibo Wang; Ashley L Kapron; Niccolo M Fiorentino; Charles L Saltzman; K Bo Foreman; Andrew E Anderson
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2016-09-01       Impact factor: 2.097

Review 5.  A systematic review on ankle injury and ankle sprain in sports.

Authors:  Daniel Tik-Pui Fong; Youlian Hong; Lap-Ki Chan; Patrick Shu-Hang Yung; Kai-Ming Chan
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 11.136

6.  An epidemiological survey on ankle sprain.

Authors:  M S Yeung; K M Chan; C H So; W Y Yuan
Journal:  Br J Sports Med       Date:  1994-06       Impact factor: 13.800

7.  Six DOF in vivo kinematics of the ankle joint complex: Application of a combined dual-orthogonal fluoroscopic and magnetic resonance imaging technique.

Authors:  Richard J de Asla; Lu Wan; Harry E Rubash; Guoan Li
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 3.494

8.  In vivo kinematics of the tibiotalar joint after lateral ankle instability.

Authors:  Adam M Caputo; Jun Y Lee; Chuck E Spritzer; Mark E Easley; James K DeOrio; James A Nunley; Louis E DeFrate
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2009-07-21       Impact factor: 6.202

9.  Statistical, Morphometric, Anatomical Shape Model (Atlas) of Calcaneus.

Authors:  Aleksandra U Melinska; Patryk Romaszkiewicz; Justyna Wagel; Marek Sasiadek; D Robert Iskander
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-08-13       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 10.  Foot and ankle history and clinical examination: A guide to everyday practice.

Authors:  Sulaiman Alazzawi; Mohamed Sukeik; Daniel King; Krishna Vemulapalli
Journal:  World J Orthop       Date:  2017-01-18
View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  Intraoperative Assessment of Reduction of the Ankle Syndesmosis.

Authors:  Kevin A Hao; Robert A Vander Griend; Jennifer A Nichols; Christopher W Reb
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2022-07-13
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.