| Literature DB >> 35126657 |
Hatem H Allam1, Alaa Shafie2, Abdulrahman J Almalki3, Dhefallal E Almalki3, Tarek Alsayad4, Ahmed M Alziyadi5, Mosfer A Al-Walah1, Lamiaa K Elsayyad1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Obesity among children became of high concern. Obesity can affect many health aspects including muscular strength. Downhill walking is a useful intervention to enhance muscular strength, especially in older adults.Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35126657 PMCID: PMC8816586 DOI: 10.1155/2022/1128794
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Appl Bionics Biomech ISSN: 1176-2322 Impact factor: 1.781
Figure 1Flowchart demonstrating the study participants.
Baseline comparisons for the demographic data.
| Variables | LWG ( | DWG ( | Mean difference | Sig. |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 10.53 ± 1.18 | 10.86 ± 0.96 | -0.33 | 0.39 |
| Weight (kg) | 55.81 ± 5.49 | 57.70 ± 4.44 | -1.89 | 0.29 |
| Height (m) | 1.52 ± 0.061 | 1.56 ± 0.040 | -0.031 | 0.11 |
| BMI | 23.97 ± 1.19 | 23.83 ± 0.87 | 0.14 | 0.70 |
| BMI percentile | 96.56 ± 1.15 | 96.19 ± 0.83 | 0.375 | 0.30 |
M: mean; SD: standard deviation; Sig.: significance; LWG: level walking group; DWG: downhill walking group.
Baseline comparisons for the study variables.
| Variables | LWG ( | DWG ( | Mean difference | Sig. |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PNET-plantar (N·m/kg) | 1.48 ± 0.15 | 1.58 ± 0.17 | -0.102 | 0.08 |
| PNCT-plantar (N·m/kg) | 1.02 ± 0.19 | 0.97 ± 0.18 | 0.047 | 0.49 |
| PNET-dorsi (N·m/kg) | 0.77 ± 0.05 | 0.80 ± 0.052 | -0.026 | 0.16 |
| PNCT-dorsi (N·m/kg) | 0.41 ± 0.056 | 0.42 ± 0.046 | -0.014 | 0.43 |
PNET: peak normalized eccentric torque; PNCT: peak normalized concentric torque; M: mean; SD: standard deviation; Sig.: significance; LWG: level walking group; DWG: downhill walking group.
Repeated measures MANOVA within- and between-subjects effect.
| Effect |
| Sig. | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Between subjects | Groups | 39.28 | 0.0001 |
| Within subjects | Time | 172.36 | 0.0001 |
| Time∗groups | 92.26 | 0.0001 |
Sig.: significance.
Bonferroni test for study variables' pairwise comparisons pre-postintervention (within subjects).
| Peak normalized torque (N·m/kg) | Preintervention ( | Postintervention ( | Mean difference | Sig. | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LWG | Eccentric-plantar | 1.48 ± 0.15 | 1.5 ± 0.15 | -0.018 | 0.27 |
| Concentric-plantar | 1.02 ± 0.19 | 1.06 ± 0.19 | -0.039 | 0.37 | |
| Eccentric-dorsi | 0.77 ± 0.05 | 0.80 ± 0.05 | -0.028 | 0.37 | |
| Concentric-dorsi | 0.41 ± 0.056 | 0.42 ± 0.06 | -0.016 | 0.11 | |
|
| |||||
| DWG | Eccentric-plantar | 1.58 ± 0.17 | 2.19 ± 0.16 | -0.61 | 0.0001 |
| Concentric-plantar | 0.97 ± 0.18 | 1.2 ± 0.1 | -0.23 | 0.0001 | |
| Eccentric-dorsi | 0.80 ± 0.052 | 1.1 ± 0.16 | -0.30 | 0.0001 | |
| Concentric-dorsi | 0.42 ± 0.046 | 0.49 ± 0.08 | -0.07 | 0.0001 | |
M: mean; SD: standard deviation; Sig.: significance; LWG: level walking group; DWG: downhill walking group.
Bonferroni test for the study variables' pairwise comparisons postintervention (between subjects).
| Peak normalized torque (N·m/kg) | LWG ( | DWG ( | Mean difference | Sig. |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eccentric-plantar | 1.5 ± 0.15 | 2.19 ± 0.16 | -0.69 | 0.0001 |
| Concentric-plantar | 1.06 ± 0.19 | 1.2 ± 0.1 | -0.15 | 0.008 |
| Eccentric-dorsi | 0.80 ± 0.05 | 1.1 ± 0.16 | -0.30 | 0.0001 |
| Concentric-dorsi | 0.42 ± 0.06 | 0.49 ± 0.08 | -0.06 | 0.018 |
M: mean; SD: standard deviation; Sig.: significance; LWG: level walking group; DWG: downhill walking group.