Biomechanical Analysis of Lateral Steps

Transcription

“Title” by [author(s) RH style]
Journal of Applied Biomechanics
© 2012 Human Kinetics, Inc.
Note. This article will be published in a forthcoming issue of
the Journal of Applied Biomechanics. The article appears here
in its accepted, peer-reviewed form, as it was provided by the
submitting author. It has not been copyedited, proofread, or
formatted by the publisher.
Section: Original Research
Article Title: A Biomechanical Study of Side Steps at Different Distances
Authors: Yuki Inaba1, Shinsuke Yoshioka2, Yoshiaki Iida1, Dean C. Hay3, Senshi Fukashiro1
Affiliations: 1Department of Life Sciences, University of Tokyo, Meguro, Tokyo, Japan.
2
Faculty of Sport and Health Science, Ritsumeikan University, Kusatsu, Shiga, Japan.
3
School of Physical and Health Education, Nipissing University, North Bay, Ontario, Canada.
Journal: Journal of Applied Biomechanics
©2012 Human Kinetics, Inc.
Article Type: Original Research
A Biomechanical Study of Side Steps at Different Distances
Full names and email address of all authors:
- Yuki Inaba, M.S.1;email: [email protected]
- Shinsuke Yoshioka, Ph.D.2; email: [email protected]
- Yoshiaki Iida, M.S.1; email: [email protected]
- Dean C. Hay, Ph.D.3; email: [email protected]
- Senshi Fukashiro, Ph.D.1; email: [email protected]
Institutional Affiliation:
1
Department of Life Sciences, University of Tokyo, Meguro, Tokyo, Japan
2
Faculty of Sport and Health Science, Ritsumeikan University, Kusatsu, Shiga, Japan
3
School of Physical and Health Education, Nipissing University, North Bay, ON, Canada
Funding: No funding was received.
Conflict of Interests Disclosure: None of the authors have commercial or other interests that
may conflict with the integrity of this scientific work
Correspondence address:
-Name: Yuki Inaba
-Address: 3-8-1 Komaba, Meguro, Tokyo, 153-8902, Japan
-Email: [email protected]
Running Title: A Biomechanical Study of Side Steps
Abstract
Lateral quickness is a crucial component of many sports. However, biomechanical
factors which contribute to quickness in lateral movements have not been understood well.
Thus, the purpose of this study was to quantify three dimensional kinetics of hip, knee, and
ankle joints in side steps to understand the function of lower extremity muscle groups. Side
steps at nine different distances were performed by nine male subjects. Kinematic and ground
reaction force data were recorded, and net joint torque and work were calculated by a
standard inverse-dynamics method. Extension torques and work done at hip, knee, and ankle
joints contributed substantially to the changes in side step distances. On the other hand, hip
abduction work was not as sensitive to the changes in the side step distances. The main roles
of hip abduction torque and work were to accelerate the center of mass laterally in the earlier
phase of the movement and to keep the trunk upright, but not to generate large power for
propulsion.
Keywords: joint torque/ work, hip abduction, quickness, inverse dynamics, three
dimensional motion analysis
Word Count: 4533 words [introduction-discussion]
Introduction
Quickness in lateral movements is crucial for skill performance in various sports
such as basketball, tennis, and football. In those sports, athletes are required to have an ability
to move quickly in the lateral direction to catch a ball, to defend an opponent, or to evade a
defender. Therefore, considerable attention has been given to investigating the abilities that
are required to perform lateral movements quickly, like change-of-direction movements. For
example, Little and Williams1 examined relations between a 10 m test, a flying 20 m test, and
a zigzag test and found relatively low coefficients of determination between them. Based on
the results, they concluded that the ability to accelerate, sprint, and change direction are
relatively independent. Elsewhere, it was reported that the correlations between agility tests
and leg extensor strength or power are generally low.2-3 The conclusion was that though leg
extensor strength and power could predict a portion of the ability of the change of direction
movement, technical factors and muscle groups other than extensors should be also taken into
consideration to predict the ability better.
In order to reveal which muscle groups or what kind of technique contribute to
enhance quickness in lateral movements, we believe it is essential to investigate the
mechanisms of the movements biomechanically. Over the past few decades, a lot of
researchers have provided biomechanical and electromyographic data of the change of
direction movements. However, most of those studies were aimed to reveal the causes or
prevention methods of knee ligament injuries4-13 that could occur during lateral movements.
For instance, Besier et al.14 have reported that large knee joint valgus/varus and
external/internal moments are applied at the supporting limb during cutting movements, and
suggested that those could be the causes of the knee ligament injuries. These studies have
quantified the joint moments at the supporting limb and identified the knee injury
mechanisms. However, it is not understood how the joint moments at lower limb contribute
to propel the body laterally, or to the intended direction. Neptune et al.15 investigated
side-shuffle and v-cut movements to provide a database of kinematic and electromyographic
data to describe muscle functions during those movements as well as to understand the causes
of ankle sprain injury. They reported coordination of lower limb muscles, and identified
possible muscle functional roles during those movements by combining the kinematic and
eletromyographic data. Yet, which muscle groups most contribute to generate lateral velocity
is not understood, and that is the important question that needs to be solved in order to find
the determinant factor of quickness in lateral movements.
The inverse dynamics method which calculate net joint torques, power, and work has
been used to understand mechanical function of groups of lower limb muscles16 in forward
and upward movements, such as running,17-20 and vertical and horizontal jumps.21-25
Conducting joint kinetic analysis on these movements were effective because the objective of
the movement was clearer, such as maximizing velocity toward upward or forward direction.
On the other hand the change of direction movement literally involves movements in at least
two directions. In fact, the contribution of joint kinetics to generate lateral propulsion in
movements only toward the lateral direction is poorly understood. Thus, the purpose of this
study was to investigate the contribution of hip, knee and ankle joint three-dimensional
kinetics in generating lateral propulsion in side steps from quiet stance.
We expected that the kinetic variables that contribute to lateral velocity at take-off
would increase when the step distances increased. Side steps consist mainly of hip, knee, and
ankle extension/flexion, and hip abduction/adduction motions. Among those, a greater degree
of hip abduction motion is a unique feature to side steps when compared to upward or
forward movements. Thus, hip abduction motion is sometimes considered as a key movement
for lateral movements and training of hip abductors are recommended for lateral
movements.26-27 Kea et al.28 reported that hip abduction and adduction strength were not the
determinant of side hopping distances. Some researchers who insist that hip abduction is a
key movement for lateral movements also insist that hip abductors act as a stabilizer, too. It is
obvious that hip abduction motion is involved more in side steps than in sagittal plane
movements; however, the role of hip abduction motion in generating lateral velocity or to
provide stability is not understood. As for extension, a low but significant relation was found
between leg extensor strength and power and agility performance.2-3 Based on these findings,
it was predicted that even though hip abduction motion is important for lateral movements,
increased side stepping distances depend on extension kinetics but do not depend on hip
abduction kinetics. Thus, we hypothesized that kinetic variables related to lower limb joint
extension would increase with the step distances while those of hip abduction would not.
Methods
Experimental design
Nine healthy male subjects (age: 24.3 ± 1.1 y; height: 1.74 ± 0.06 m; body mass:
75.6 ± 9.9 kg; mean ± standard deviation) participated in the experiment. The present study
was approved by the ethics committee of the University of Tokyo. The subjects read the
description of the purpose, risks, and basic procedures of the experiment and gave their
written informed consents for participation.
Subjects performed leftward side steps at nine different distances that were set to
20-100 % (D20-D100: at intervals of 10 %) of their height. The target distances were marked
with pieces of color tape on the floor. Subjects pushed off the floor with their right foot, and
landed with their left foot. They kept their arms akimbo and faced forward throughout the
trial. The subjects were asked to make the movement time as short as possible. After adequate
practice, they performed side steps at nine different distances in a random order to account
for fatigue, until three successful trials for each distance were obtained.
Data collection
Thirty one reflective markers were attached to the anatomical landmarks of the
subjects to record three-dimensional body movements by 3D-Motion Analysis System with
seven cameras at 200 Hz (HAWK Digital System, Motion Analysis Corporation, Santa Rosa,
CA, USA). Twelve segments were defined by the anatomical landmarks: head, trunk, right
and left upper arms, right and left forearms, right and left thighs, right and left shanks, right
and left feet. The right foot was placed on a force plate (9281B, Kistler, Switzerland), and
ground reaction forces (GRF) were recorded at 1000 Hz.
Data Analysis
Kinematic and kinetic data were calculated for the push-off leg. Step phase was
defined as the range from the moment of start of the step movements to the moment of
take-off of push-off foot, which was determined by GRF data. All data were normalized to
step phase. In the analysis, the mean of the data of three steps were used as the representative
value of each step distance of each subject.
Kinematic Data
The origin of the global axes was set to the corner of the force plate. The X, Y, and Z
axes were set to medial-lateral, anterior-posterior, and vertical directions, respectively. The
subjects stepped along the direction of global X-axis. The obtained positional data of markers
attached to the body were smoothed using a fourth-order zero phase shift Butterworth
low-pass filter at the cut off frequency of 6 Hz. The cut-off frequency was determined by
conducting a residual analysis.29 The center of mass of the whole body (COM) was calculated
based on the body segment parameters reported by de Leva et al.30 The position of COM was
expressed with respect to the position of center of pressure (COP) measured by the forceplate
under the right foot. The distance between COP and COM also represents the foot placement
with respect to COM. The lateral and the vertical components of velocity of COM at take-off
(vlateral and vvertical) with respect to the global axes were calculated by numerical
differentiation.
The local coordinate systems were set to each of pelvis, thigh, shank, and foot
segments. They were all right-handed orthogonal systems which were defined using the cross
products of unit vectors defined by anatomical landmarks on each segment. The x-axis of the
pelvis segment was the unit vector from the left anterior iliac spine (ASIS) to the right ASIS;
the z-axis was the cross product of the x-axis and the unit vector from the midpoint of right
and left posterior iliac spine to the midpoint of right and left ASIS; and the y-axis was the
cross product of the z- and x-axes. The z-axis of the thigh segment was the unit vector from
knee joint center to hip joint center; the x-axis was the cross product of the unit vector
defined by the cross product of the vector from the hip joint center to the lateral epicondyle of
the femur and the vector from the hip joint center to the medial epicondyle of femur and
z-axis; and the y-axis was the cross product of the z-axis and x-axis. The z-axis of the leg
segment was the unit vector from ankle joint center to knee joint center; the x-axis was the
cross product of the unit vector defined by the cross product of the vector from knee joint
center to lateral malleolus and the vector from knee joint center to medial malleolus and
z-axis; and the y-axis was the cross product of z-axis and x-axis. The y-axis of the foot
segment was the unit vector from calcaneal tuberosity to head of the second metatarsal; the z
axis was the cross products of the unit vector from head of the first metatarsal to head of the
fifth metatarsal and y-axis; and the x-axis was the cross products of the y-axis and z-axis. The
local coordinate system of a proximal segment of a joint was used as a rotation axis. Joint
angles were calculated as the relative position of distal segment with respect to proximal
segment by using Cardan angle definition (x-y’-z’’ sequence).29 The rotation angle around the
x-axis was defined as hip and knee extension/flexion and ankle plantarflexion/dorsiflexion,
around
the
y’-axis
as
hip
abduction/adduction,
knee
valgus/varus,
and
ankle
eversion/inversion, and around the z’’-axis as hip and knee external/internal rotation and
ankle abduction/adduction. The range of joint angle change was calculated for each axis of
rotation as the difference between minimum and maximum values of joint angles around each
axis in the step phase.
The orientation of the push-off leg was analyzed by computing the angle of the line
connecting right ankle joint center and right hip joint center, with respect to the global
medial-lateral axis. Also, the orientation of trunk was analyzed by computing the angle of the
line connecting right ASIS and left ASIS, with respect to the global medial-lateral axis.
Kinetic Data
The orientation of the ground reaction forces (GRF) in the frontal plane was
calculated as follows:
The orientation of the GRF in the frontal plane = arctan (GRFvertical/GRFlateral)
Three dimensional net joint torques were calculated by the standard inverse-dynamics
calculation, using GRF data and kinematic data.29 The net joint torque calculated in this study
is expressed as the internal (muscle) moments with respect to proximal segment local
coordinate system. Joint power was calculated as the product of joint torque and joint angular
velocity. Total joint work was calculated by integrating the joint power from the start of the
movement to toe-off. Positive and negative joint work was computed as the numerical
integration of only positive or negative values, respectively. The sum of positive or negative
work was the sum of positive or negative portion of the work at all joints around each axis
during the whole step phase. Joint power, joint angular velocity, and joint work were
calculated with respect to the proximal segment local coordinate system.
Statistics
One-way repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests were conducted for
vlateral and vvertical, frontal angle of GRF, the lateral position of lowest point of the COM, range
of motion, peak value of the joint torque, joint angular velocity, and joint power and joint
work at hip, knee, and ankle joints. When the effect of distance was found, post-hoc multiple
comparison Tukey tests were conducted for establishing differences between step distances
(significance level p<0.05).
Results
Even though hip and knee extension torques and ankle plantarflexion torque
increased as the step distances increased, hip abduction torque did not increase with the step
distances (Fig.1) as opposed to the change in hip abduction angles (Fig.4). Significant effects
of step distances (p<0.05) were found in peak torques at all axes of the hip, knee, and ankle
joints except knee rotation. The peak amplitude of hip extension torque increased from 0.42 ±
0.18 N m•kg-1 at D20 to 2.01 ± 0.29 N m•kg-1 at D100 (D20<D40<D60<D80<D90-D100;
p<0.05, partial η2=0.91, (a) in Fig.1). Also, increases in peak torques were observed in knee
extension torque from 0.27 ± 0.39 N m•kg-1 at D20 to 2.11 ± 0.66 N m•kg-1 at D100
(D20-D30<D40< D50<D80-D90;
p<0.05, partial η2=0.85, (b) in Fig.1). However, there
were no significant increases from D60 to D100 in knee extension peak torques. The peak
ankle plantarflexion torque also increased from 1.11 ± 0.37 N m•kg-1 at D20 to 1.78 ± 0.27 N
m•kg-1 at D50 but did not increase in distances longer than D50 (D20<D40< D70-D100;
p<0.05, partial η2=0.72, (c) in Fig.1). On the other hand, even though the effect of the
distance was found (p<0.05), the peak amplitude of hip abduction torque did not increase
with the step distances (D20>D80-D100; p<0.05, partial η2=0.62, (d) in Fig.1). There were no
significant changes from 1.29±0.25 N m•kg-1 at D20 to 1.16 ± 0.26 N m•kg-1 at D70 in hip
abduction torque. It even decreased from D20 to 1.09 ± 0.29 N m•kg-1 at D100 ((d) in Fig.1).
The peak ankle eversion torque increased from 0.25 ± 0.14 N m•kg-1 at D20 to 0.99 ± 0.19 N
m•kg-1 at D100 with the step distances ((e) in Fig.1). However, since the direction of angular
velocity and the joint torque was opposite, the resultant joint power was negative. When the
peaks of joint torques were plotted against vlateral, joint torques that were most sensitive to the
changes in vlateral were those of hip and knee extension, and ankle plantarflexion (Fig.3 left).
The sum of the positive joint work of hip, knee, and ankle joints increased from 0.42
± 0.17 J•kg-1 at D20 to 3.2 ± 0.42 J•kg-1 at D100 as the step distances increased
(D20-D30<D40<D50<D60-D70<D80<D90<D100; p<0.05) (Fig.2). The rate of increase in
positive joint work from D20 to D100 (D100/D20) was greatest in hip extension, and positive
joint work at D100 was 31.3 times greater than that at D20. The rates of increase were
relatively large in work at knee extension (D100/D20=15.4), ankle plantarflexion
(D100/D20=11.7), and ankle eversion (D100/D20=11.3). However, the rate of increase in hip
abduction positive work was as small as 2.09 because it did not increase with the step
distances longer than D60 (D20<D40<D60; p<0.05). The other rates of increase were smaller
(D100/D20 = 2.88~4.54) than those in hip, knee, and ankle joint extension work.
The sum of the negative joint work decreased with the step distances from -0.23 ±
0.14 J•kg-1 at D20 to -2.01 ± 0.66 J•kg-1 at D100 (D20-D30>D50>D70>D90, D100; p<0.05)
(Fig.2). Large negative work was done at hip and knee extension. Negative hip abduction
work decreased from (-3.15 ± 5.21)×10-3 J•kg-1 at D20 to -0.27 ± 0.20 J•kg-1 at D100 with
the step distances (D20-D40>D80~D100; p<0.05). The sum of the total joint work at hip,
knee, and ankle joints increased with the step distances from -0.20 ± 0.07 J/kg at D20 to 1.22
± 0.73 J•kg-1 at D100 (D20<D50<D100; p<0.05). The proportions of hip abduction work to
the sum of the total work were relatively high at the shorter distances compared to those at
longer distances. Total hip abduction work decreased from D60 to D100. When total joint
works were plotted against vlateral, joint works which were most sensitive to the changes in
vlateral were
those
done
at
the
knee
extension/flexion
axis,
and
the
ankle
plantarflexion/dorsiflexion axis (Fig.3 right).
The most notable changes found in the range of angle changes when the step
distances increased occurred at hip, knee, and ankle extension/flexion motions and hip
abduction/adduction motions (significant effect of step distance, p<0.05, Fig.4). The range of
hip extension/flexion angle changes increased from 16.4 ± 3.5 degrees at D20 to 47.8 ± 6.7
degrees at D100 ((f) in Fig.4). The range of knee extension/flexion angles increased from
27.5 ± 6.1 degrees at D20 to 58.2 ± 5.7 degrees at D100 ((g) in Fig.4). Also, ankle
plantarflexion/dorsiflexion angles increased from 8.1 ± 3.2 degrees at D20 to 55.6 ± 4.0
degrees at D100 ((h) in Fig.4). Hip abduction/adduction angles increased from 8.4 ± 2.6
degrees at D20 to 41.4 ± 3.9 degrees at D100 ((i) in Fig.4).
The lateral component of velocity of COM at take-off (vlateral) significantly increased
from D20 to D100 (Table 1) as expected. Even though the vertical component of velocity of
COM at take-off (vvertical) also increased with the step distances, it did not show as much
increases as vlateral did. Also, vvertical at any distance was much smaller than vlateral.
COM moved down lower and more laterally at the end of the contermovement phase.
Even though the lateral position of COM with respect to center of pressure (COP) at the
lowest point of COM located significantly more laterally from 0.16 ± 0.06 m at D20 to 0.32 ±
0.04 m at D60, there were no significant changes at the distances longer than D60. The
orientation of the push-off leg decreased with the step distances from D20 to D80. Significant
changes did not exist in the orientation of the trunk (Table 1).
A significant effect of step distance (p<0.05) was also found in the orientation of
GRF in the frontal plane (Table 1). It significantly decreased from D20 to D60, which
indicates that the GRF was tilted more laterally as the step distances increased (Table 1).
However, in the steps at distances longer than D60, the changes in the orientation of GRF in
frontal plane were smaller than the changes from D20 to D60.
Discussion
The purpose of this study was to investigate the contribution of hip, knee, and ankle
joint kinetics in performing side steps by evaluating the three dimensional kinematics and
kinetics of the push-off limb in side steps of increasing distances. We hypothesized that the
kinetic variables related to joint extension would increase with the step distances while those
of hip abduction would not. The main findings of our study that joint kinetic variables around
extension/flexion axis at hip and knee, and around the plantarflexion/dorsiflexion axis at the
ankle increased more than those at the hip abduction/adduction axis supported the hypothesis.
Therefore, it was indicated that lateral propulsion in side steps was mainly increased by
producing joint work primarily around hip and knee extension/flexion axes and ankle
plantarflexion/dorsiflexion axis, but not around the abduction/adduction or external/internal
rotation axes.
The changes in vlateral over the step distances were greater than the changes in vvertical
(Table1). Also, vlateral was always much greater than vvertical (Table1). These results confirm
that the lateral propulsion was mainly affected by controlling the lateral step distances.
Therefore, peaks of joint torques and total joint work was plotted against vlateral to observe the
changes in kinetics when the lateral propulsions are increased (Fig.3). Since joint torques
which were most sensitive to the changes in vlateral were those of hip and knee extension, and
ankle plantarflexion (Fig.3 left), it was indicated that lateral propulsion was mainly affected
by those joint torques. Also, the results that total joint work at the knee extension/flexion axis
and at the ankle plantarflexion/dorsiflexion axis increased with vlateral (Fig.3 right) indicate
that the increases in the lateral step distances, or increases in the lateral propulsion were
accomplished by increasing those total joint works. Even though the total work at hip
extension/flexion axis did not increase as much as at the knee and ankle extension/flexion
axes, the positive work at hip extension/flexion axis increased with the step distances. Thus,
positive joint work at hip extension/flexion axis also contributed to lateral propulsion. These
results are also consistent with the muscle functions predicted by electromyographic and
kinematic data reported by Neptune et al.15 that concentric activity of hip and knee extensors
and ankle plantar flexors provide acceleration in lateral movements. In addition, it is
reasonable to increase the lateral step distances by increasing joint extension motions, taking
the anatomical configuration of the human lower extremity into account. Calculating the
physiological cross sectional area of extensors and other muscles of the lower extremity
based on the parameters reported by Friederich and Brand,31 about seventy percent of the
total physiological cross sectional area is involved in extension or flexion. Also, the range of
motion was greater in flexion and extension than motions in the frontal and transverse
planes.32 Subjects took the strategy to activate the powerful extensors to perform greater joint
work.
Though the amplitude of hip and knee extension torques and ankle plantarflexion
torque increased with the step distances, the distances that the joint torques reached the
plateau were different between joints (Fig.2). In fact, it has been reported that when
increasing jump height from submaximal height to maximal height, joint torques increase in
the order from distal to proximal joints.33 They suggested that their subjects took the strategy
to increase the contribution of distal segments and minimize the movements of proximal
segments that have larger moment of inertia in submaximal jumps for enhancing movement
effectiveness. Hence, it is argued since the subjects of our study were instructed to minimize
the movement time, they took the strategy to increase the joint torques in the order from
distal to proximal joints. That is why ankle plantarflexion and knee extension torque reached
plateau earlier while hip extension torque kept increasing with step distance. This strategy
that minimized the movement of the proximal, or hip joint motion explains why joint total
work at the hip extension/flexion axis did not change as much as work at the knee and ankle
extension/flexion axes in the shorter distances.
Hip abduction torque and total work were not as sensitive to increases in vlateral as
hip, knee, and ankle extension torques and total work (Fig.3). These results suggest that it is
unlikely that hip abduction work directly contributed to increase the lateral step distances or
lateral propulsions. Nevertheless, the range of hip abduction angle changes increased with the
step distances. Also, the proportion of the hip abduction work to the sum of the total work
was relatively large at the shorter distances. Thus, the role of hip abduction movement in side
steps should not be neglected.
The positive work done at the hip abduction/adduction axis is suggested to
contribute to the acceleration of COM in the earlier phase of the side steps. The positive work
done at the hip abduction/adduction axis increased from D20 to D60, but it did not increase in
the distances longer than that (Fig.2). At the same time, the lowest position of COM moved
more laterally (Table 1), and the orientation of GRF tilted more laterally from D20 to D60
(Table1). It has been previously reported that in walking hip abductors actively control the
medial-lateral balance of COM by accelerating COM medially.34 Therefore, it is suggested
that the positive work done at hip abduction/adduction axis played a role in accelerating
COM in the earlier phase of the movement, and controlled the COM position by the time that
COM reached its lowest position. In the steps at shorter distances, not as much hip, knee, and
ankle extension work were required because the lateral propulsion to be acquired was smaller.
Therefore, the step movements were mostly accomplished just by accelerating COM by
positive hip abduction work. In the steps at longer distances, greater extension work was
necessary for acquiring greater total work to produce faster initial lateral velocity at take-off.
Still, a certain amount of positive hip abduction work must have been done to tilt the body
laterally and adjust the direction of COM acceleration to be acquired by extension work.
Fukashiro et al.23 suggested that the trunk orientation is tuned by the start of the push-off
phase so that the body is accelerated to the desired direction during the push-off phase.
Therefore, it is suggested that hip abduction work contributed to adjust the lateral position of
the COM before the start of the push-off phase so that the acceleration of COM that results
from joint extension work at hip, knee, and ankle joints during the push-off phase is directed
to the right direction in the steps of longer distances.
In addition, it is considered that hip abduction/adduction torque and joint work
contributed to keep the trunk upright. Even though the orientation of the push-off limb
decreased with the step distances, trunk orientation did not change. The push-off leg is
thought to tilt laterally because of gravity. Lyon and Day35 has reported that since COM
“falls” passively by gravity in stepping, the motion of COM is determined at the time when
the leading limb leaves the ground. If no joint torque was exerted, both push-off leg and trunk
would fall laterally by gravity. However, in this study, the orientation of the trunk was kept
upright at all phase of the steps. In walking, it has been said that the hip abductors act to keep
the pelvis level36 or to control the frontal plane body balance.37
Therefore, it is indicated
that hip abduction torque played role in keeping the trunk upright while the push-off leg was
tilted more and more laterally by gravity. This suggestion is in agreement with a previous
study that suggested that hip abductors and adductors did not act as the power generators but
as the hip stabilizer.15 In addition, the results of our study support the results of a previous
study that relatively low correlations exist between hip abductor and adductor strengths and
single-leg lateral and medial hop tests,28 since strengthening of stabilizer would not directly
contribute to increase the stepping distances. Therefore, we conclude that hip abduction work
mainly contributed to accelerating COM laterally in the earlier phase of the movement, and to
keep the trunk upright, but did not directly act to increase the side step distances.
The practical implications of this work are to strengthen the extensors and plantar
flexors of the lower extremity to increase the lateral step distances or lateral propulsion in
side steps since hip and knee extension, and ankle plantarflexion torques and work increased
with the lateral step distances. In addition, COM needs to be positioned laterally with respect
to COP or foot before the positive hip and knee extension works and ankle plantarflexion
works are done. Hence, it is recommended to facilitate quick lateral foot placement in order
to accelerate COM in a shorter duration. A certain level of strength in the hip abductors is
required to perform lateral movements quickly since they control the direction of COM
acceleration and the posture of the trunk. However, since hip abductors did not play a main
role in increasing side step distances, strengthening of extensor muscle groups will yield
greater performance gains than training hip abductors.
References
1. Little T, Williams AG. Specificity of acceleration, maximum speed, and agility in
professional soccer players. J Strength Cond Res. 2005;19(1):76-78.
2. Markovic G. Poor relationship between strength and power qualities and agility
performance. J Sport Med Phys Fit. 2007;47(3):276-283.
3. Young WB, James R, Montgomery I. Is muscle power related to running speed with
changes of direction? J Sport Med Phys Fit. 2002;42(3):282-288.
4. Beaulieu ML, Lamontagne M, Xu L. Lower limb muscle activity and kinematics of an
unanticipated cutting manoeuvre: a gender comparison. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol
Arthrosc. 2009;17(8):968-976.
5. Besier TF, Lloyd DG, Ackland TR. Muscle activation strategies at the knee during running
and cutting maneuvers. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2003;35(1):119-127.
6. Branch TP, Hunter R, Donath M. Dynamic EMG analysis of anterior cruciate deficient
legs with and without bracing during cutting. Am J Sports Med. 1989;17(1):35-41.
7. Colby S, Francisco A, Yu B, Kirkendall D, Finch M, Garrett W, Jr. Electromyographic and
kinematic analysis of cutting maneuvers. Implications for anterior cruciate ligament
injury. Am J Sports Med. 2000;28(2):234-240.
8. Dempsey AR, Lloyd DG, Elliott BC, Steele JR, Munro BJ, Russo KA. The effect of
technique change on knee loads during sidestep cutting. Med Sci Sports Exerc.
2007;39(10):1765-1773.
9. Houck J. Muscle activation patterns of selected lower extremity muscles during stepping
and cutting tasks. J Electromyogr Kines. 2003;13(6):545-554.
10. Houck JR, Duncan A, De Haven KE. Comparison of frontal plane trunk kinematics and
hip and knee moments during anticipated and unanticipated walking and side step
cutting tasks. Gait Posture. 2006;24(3):314-322.
11. McLean SG, Huang XM, van den Bogert AJ. Association between lower extremity
posture at contact and peak knee valgus moment during sidestepping: Implications for
ACL injury. Clin Biomech. 2005;20(8):863-870.
12. O'Connor KM, Bottum MC. Differences in Cutting Knee Mechanics Based on Principal
Components Analysis. Med Sci Sport Exerc. 2009;41(4):867-878.
13. Sigward SM, Powers CM. The influence of gender on knee kinematics, kinetics and
muscle activation patterns during side-step cutting. Clin Biomech. 2006;21(1):41-48.
14. Besier TF, Lloyd DG, Cochrane JL, Ackland TR. External loading of the knee joint
during running and cutting maneuvers. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2001;33(7):1168-1175.
15. Neptune RR, Wright IC, Van den Bogert AJ. Muscle coordination and function during
cutting movements. Med Sci Sport Exerc. 1999;31(2):294-302.
16. Schache AG, Blanch PD, Dorn TW, Brown NA, Rosemond D, Pandy MG. Effect of
running
speed
on
lower
limb
joint
kinetics.
Med
Sci
Sports
Exerc.
2011;43(7):1260-1271.
17. Belli A, Kyrolainen H, Komi PV. Moment and power of lower limb joints in running. Int
J Sports Med. 2002;23(2):136-141.
18. Devita P, Skelly WA. Intrasubject variability of lower-extremity joint moments of force
during the stance phase of running. Hum Movement Sci. 1990;9(2):99-115.
19. McClay I, Manal K. Three-dimensional kinetic analysis of running: significance of
secondary planes of motion. Med Sci Sport Exerc. 1999;31(11):1629-1637.
20. Winter DA. Energy generation and absorption at the ankle and knee during fast, natural,
and slow cadences. Clin Orthop Relat R. 1983(175):147-154.
21. Bobbert MF, van der Krogt MM, van Doorn H, de Ruiter CJ. Effects of fatigue of
plantarflexors on control and performance in vertical jumping. Med Sci Sports Exerc.
2011;43(4):673-684.
22. Bobbert MF, van Ingen Schenau GJ. Coordination in vertical jumping. J Biomech.
1988;21(3):249-262.
23. Fukashiro S, Besier TF, Barrett R, Cochrane JL, Nagano A, Lloyd DG. Direction control
in standing horizontal and vertical jumps. Int J Sport Health Sci. 2005;3:272-279.
24. Jones SL, Caldwell GE. Mono- and biarticular muscle activity during jumping in different
directions. J Appl Biomech. 2003;19(3):205-222.
25. Ridderikhoff A, Batelaan JH, Bobbert MF. Jumping for distance: control of the external
force in squat jumps. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1999;31(8):1196-1204.
26. Roozen M. Developing hip joint adduction and abduction strength. NSCA's Performance
Training Journal. 2005;4(4):18-19. http://www.nsca-lift.org/perform/articles/04047.p
df
27. Yessis M. Kinesiology of Exercise: a Safe and Effective Way to Improve Bodybuilding
and Athletic Performance. Indianapolis: Masters Press; 1992:29-31.
28. Kea J, Kramer J, Forwell L, Birmingham T. Hip abduction-adduction strength and
one-leg, hop tests: Test-retest reliability and relationship to function in elite ice
hockey players. J Orthop Sport Phys. 2001;31(8):446-455.
29. Winter DA. Biomechanics and Motor Control of Human Movement. 3rd ed. Hoboken,
New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2005.
30. de Leva P. Adjustments to Zatsiorsky-Seluyanov's segment inertia parameters. J Biomech.
1996;29(9):1223-1230.
31. Friederich JA, Brand RA. Muscle-fiber architecture in the human lower-limb. J Biomech.
1990;23(1):91-95.
32. Boone DC, Azen SP. Normal range of motion of joints in male subjects. J Bone Joint
Surg Am. 1979;61(5):756-759.
33. Vanrenterghem J, Lees A, Lenoir M, Aerts P, De Clercq D. Performing the vertical jump:
movement
adaptations
for
submaximal
jumping.
Hum
Movement
Sci.
2004;22(6):713-727.
34. Pandy MG, Lin YC, Kim HJ. Muscle coordination of mediolateral balance in normal
walking. J Biomech. 2010;43(11):2055-2064.
35. Lyon IN, Day BL. Control of frontal plane body motion in human stepping. Exp Brain
Res. 1997;115(2):345-356.
36. Gottschalk F, Kourosh S, Leveau B. The functional anatomy of tensor fasciae latae and
gluteus medius and minimus. J Anat. 1989;166:179-189.
37. Winter DA, MacKinnon CD, Ruder GK, Wieman C. An integrated EMG/biomechanical
model of upper body balance and posture during human gait. Prog Brain Res.
1993;97:359-367.
Figure 1: Joint torques of hip, knee, and ankle joints of push-off limb during side steps at
D20, D40, D60, D80, and D100. Mean variables of nine subjects are plotted. The peak
amplitude of (a) hip extension torque, (b) knee extension torque, (c) ankle plantarflexion
torque, and (e) ankle eversion torque increased with the step distances. The peak amplitude of
(d) hip abduction torque did not increase with the step distances.
Figure 2: (top) positive joint work and (bottom) negative joint work. Black bar: hip and knee
extension/flexion and ankle plantarflexion/dorsiflexion work. Gray bar: hip
abduction/adduction, knee valgus/varus, and ankle eversion/inversion work. White bar: hip
and knee exteral/internal rotation and ankle abduction/ adduction work.
Figure 3: (left) The relationship between lateral velocity of COM at take-off and peak torque
of hip (top), knee (middle), and ankle joint (bottom). (right) The relationship between lateral
velocity of COM at take-off and total work of hip (top), knee (middle), and ankle joint
(bottom). Mean variables of nine subjects are plotted, and vertical line represents SD.
Figure 4: Joint angles of hip, knee, and ankle joints of push-off limb during side steps at D20,
D40, D60, D80, and D100. Mean variables of nine subjects are plotted. The range of joint
angle changes in (f) hip extension/flexion, (g) knee extension/flexion, (h) ankle
plantarflexion/dorsiflexion, and (i) hip abduction/adduction increased with the step distances.
Table 1: Mean and SD of vlateral, vvertical, the orientation of GRF, the push-off limb, and the
trunk in frontal plane, and COP-COM distance when COM is at the lowest position. *: partial
η2
D20
D30
D40
D50
D60
D70
D80
D90
D100
Statistics (p<0.05)
Effect
Size*
mean
0.47
0.76
1.01
1.33
1.64
1.92
2.19
2.40
2.56
0.99
SD
0.06
0.12
0.11
0.10
0.08
0.08
0.12
0.13
0.12
D20<D30<D40
<D50<D60<D70
<D80<D90<D100
mean
-0.04
-0.01
0.11
0.17
0.17
0.17
0.24
0.32
0.33
D20<D50-D100
0.55
SD
0.07
0.05
0.11
0.12
0.14
0.17
0.17
0.19
0.26
mean
79.9
78.0
75.8
73.4
71.1
69.4
68.2
68.1
66.8
1.3
86.8
1.6
82.5
1.9
79.2
2.6
76.5
2.6
73.8
2.8
70.7
3.5
69.1
3.8
69.2
3.6
69.8
D20-D30>D40>D50
>D60-D70>D100
0.93
SD
mean
SD
3.2
3.9
4.0
4.8
5.9
6.4
6.4
7.6
8.7
D20>D40>D60>
D80-D100
0.85
mean
-0.1
0.8
0.8
1.0
1.4
1.0
1.2
1.1
0.2
SD
3.1
2.8
2.7
2.8
2.6
3.2
3.2
2.7
2.9
mean
0.16
0.23
0.27
0.29
0.32
0.36
0.38
0.37
0.36
SD
0.08
0.10
0.09
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.05
0.07
Step Distance
Vlateral
(m•s-1)
Vvertical
(m•s-1)
Orientation
of the GRF
(deg.)
Orientation
of the
Push-off
Limb (deg.)
Orientation
of the Trunk
(deg.)
COP-COM
Distance
(m)
n.s.
D20<D30<D60-D100
0.78

Biomechanical Analysis of Lateral Steps

Transcription

Similar documents

7pm Where

MADE IN GERMANY

KoolAir Ankle w/ Valve

layout 307

Hip Injuries in Young Athletes - Rady Children`s Hospital

Osteokinematics and Arthrokinematics of the Hip

complete line of Preventative and Rehabilitative Knee and Ankle

DEPUY SYNTHES SOLUTIONS

Florida-bred Mare Brings $120000

Graston-Hall Method.Com