Literature DB >> 9675692

The vertical displacement of the center of mass during walking: a comparison of four measurement methods.

M Saini1, D C Kerrigan, M A Thirunarayan, M Duff-Raffaele.   

Abstract

Measuring the vertical displacement of the center of mass (COM) of the body during walking may provide useful information about the energy required to walk. Four methods of varying complexity to estimate the vertical displacement of the COM were compared in 25 able-bodied, female subjects. The first method, the sacral marker method, utilized an external marker on the sacrum as representative of the COM of the body. The second method, the reconstructed pelvis method, which also utilized a marker over the sacrum, theoretically controlled for pelvic tilt motion. The third method, the segmental analysis method, involved measuring motion of the trunk and limb segments. The fourth method, the forceplate method, involved estimating the COM displacement from ground reaction force measurements. A two-tailed paired t-test within an ANOVA showed no statistically significant difference between the sacral marker and the reconstructed pelvis methods (p = 0.839). There was also no statistically significant difference between the sacral marker and the segmental analysis method (p = 0.119) or between the reconstructed pelvis and the segmental analysis method (p = 0.174). It follows that the first method, which is the most simple, can provide essentially the same estimate of the vertical displacement of the COM as the more complicated second and third measures. The forceplate method produced data with a lower range and a different distribution than the other three methods. There was a statistically significant difference between the forceplate method and the other methods (p < 0.01 for each of the three comparisons). The forceplate method provides information that is statistically significantly different from the results of the kinematic methods. The magnitude of the difference is large enough to be physiologically significant and further studies to define the sources of the differences and the relative validity of the two approaches are warranted.

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9675692     DOI: 10.1115/1.2834293

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomech Eng        ISSN: 0148-0731            Impact factor:   2.097


  15 in total

1.  Determinants of gait as applied to children with cerebral palsy.

Authors:  S D Russell; B C Bennett; D C Kerrigan; M F Abel
Journal:  Gait Posture       Date:  2006-11-21       Impact factor: 2.840

2.  Walking performance and its recovery in chronic stroke in relation to extent of lesion overlap with the descending motor tract.

Authors:  H Dawes; C Enzinger; H Johansen-Berg; M Bogdanovic; C Guy; J Collett; H Izadi; C Stagg; D Wade; P M Matthews
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2007-12-21       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Loss of balance during balance beam walking elicits a multifocal theta band electrocortical response.

Authors:  Amy R Sipp; Joseph T Gwin; Scott Makeig; Daniel P Ferris
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2013-08-07       Impact factor: 2.714

4.  Gait adaptations to simultaneous cognitive and mechanical constraints.

Authors:  Emad Al-Yahya; Helen Dawes; Johnathan Collett; Ken Howells; Hooshang Izadi; Derick T Wade; Janet Cockburn
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2009-08-12       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  No apparent ecological trend to the flight-initiating jump performance of five bat species.

Authors:  James D Gardiner; Robert L Nudds
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2011-07-01       Impact factor: 3.312

6.  Validation of simplified centre of mass models during gait in individuals with chronic stroke.

Authors:  Andrew H Huntley; Alison Schinkel-Ivy; Anthony Aqui; Avril Mansfield
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2017-07-31       Impact factor: 2.063

7.  Analysis of biases in dynamic margins of stability introduced by the use of simplified center of mass estimates during walking and turning.

Authors:  Kathryn L Havens; Tatri Mukherjee; James M Finley
Journal:  Gait Posture       Date:  2017-10-05       Impact factor: 2.840

8.  Can sacral marker approximate center of mass during gait and slip-fall recovery among community-dwelling older adults?

Authors:  Feng Yang; Yi-Chung Pai
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2014-10-30       Impact factor: 2.712

9.  Running Footwear and Impact Peak Differences in Recreational Runners.

Authors:  Federico Roggio; Bruno Trovato; Marta Zanghì; Luca Petrigna; Gianluca Testa; Vito Pavone; Giuseppe Musumeci
Journal:  Biology (Basel)       Date:  2022-05-26

10.  Evidence for a mass dependent step-change in the scaling of efficiency in terrestrial locomotion.

Authors:  Robert L Nudds; Jonathan R Codd; William I Sellers
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2009-09-07       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.