Dataset Information

Time-integrated propulsive and braking impulses do not depend on walking speed.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Enhancing propulsion during walking is often a focus in physical therapy for those with impaired gait. However, there is no consensus in the literature for assessing braking and propulsion. Both are typically measured from the anterior-posterior ground reaction force (AP-GRF). While normalization of AP-GRF force by bodyweight is commonly done in the analysis, different methods for AP-GRF time axis normalization are used.

Research question

Does walking speed affect propulsion and/or braking, and how do different methods for calculating propulsion and braking impact the conclusion, in both healthy adults and those with lower limb impairment?

Methods

We investigated three different analysis methods for assessing propulsion. 1. BW-TimeIntegration: Bodyweight (BW) normalized time integration of AP-GRF (units of BWs). 2. BW-%StanceIntegration: BW normalized AP-GRF is resampled to percent stance phase prior to integration (units of BW%Stance). 3. BW-Peak: BW normalized peak force (units of BW). We applied these methods to two data sets. One data set included AP-GRFs from trials of slow, self-selected, and fast walking speeds for 203 healthy controls (HCs); a second data set included subjects with lower limb orthopedic injuries.

Results

Using the BW-TimeIntegration method, we found no effect of walking speed on propulsion for HCs. Time integration over the longer stance phase of slower walking balanced the lower magnitude AP-GRFs of slower walking, resulting in a time-integrated impulse that was the same regardless of walking speed. In contrast, the other two methods that are not time integration methods found that propulsion increased with walking speed. Similarly, in the gait pathology data set, differences in results were found depending on the analysis method used.

Significance

For many gait studies concerning propulsion and/or braking, the impulse measure used should be related to the body's change of momentum, necessitating an analysis method with a time integration of the AP-GRF.

SUBMITTER: Deffeyes JE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8316424 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Past studies have utilized external interfaces like resistive bands and motor-generated pulling systems to increase limb propulsion during walking on a motorized treadmill. However, assessing changes in limb propulsion against increasing resistance demands during self-controlled walking has not been undertaken. PURPOSE:We assessed limb propulsion against increasing fore-aft loading demands by applying graded fore-aft (FA) resistance at the center of mass during walking in a novel, intent-driven treadmill environment that allowed participants to control their walking speeds. We hypothesized that to maintain a target speed against progressively increasing resistance, participants would proportionately increase their limb propulsion without increasing vertical force production, with accompanying increases in trailing limb angle and positive joint work. METHODS:Seventeen healthy-nonimpaired participants (mean age 52?yrs., SD?=?11) walked at a target, self-controlled speed of 1.0?m/s against 10, 15, 20, and 25% (% body weight) FA resistance levels. We primarily assessed linear slope values across FA resistance levels for mean propulsive force and impulse and vertical impulse of the dominant limb using one-sample t-tests. We further assessed changes in trailing and leading limb angles and joint work using one-way ANOVAs. RESULTS:Participants maintained their target velocity within an a priori defined acceptable range of 1.0?m/s?±?0.2. They significantly increased propulsion proportional to FA resistance (propulsive force mean slope?=?2.45, SD?=?0.7, t (16) =14.44, p?<?0.01; and propulsive impulse mean slope?=?0.7, SD?=?0.25, t (16)?=?11.84, p?<?0.01), but had no changes in vertical impulse (mean slope?=?-?0.04, SD =0.17, p?>?0.05) across FA resistance levels. Mean trailing limb angle increased from 24.3° at 10% resistance to 27.4° at 25% (p?<?0.05); leading limb angle decreased from -?18.4° to -?12.6° (p?<?0.05). We also observed increases in total positive limb work (F (1.7, 26)?=?16.88, p???0.001, ?2?=?0.5), primarily attributed to the hip and ankle joints. CONCLUSIONS:FA resistance applied during self-driven walking resulted in increased propulsive-force output of healthy-nonimpaired individuals with accompanying biomechanical changes that facilitated greater limb propulsion. Future rehabilitation interventions for neurological populations may be able to utilize this principle to design task-specific interventions like progressive strength training and workload manipulation during aerobic training for improving walking function.