Professional Documents
Culture Documents
.I Rmwchanrcs,
Vol. 28. No. 6. pp 733 75%. {i/9$
Copyright Q 1995 Elscwer Saencc Lta
Printed in Great Britain. All rights rrwved
0021~ 929095 s9 50 4 !b.W!
0021-9290(94)00124-3
TECHNICAL
NOTE
WHAT
MODEL?
INTRODUCTION
AND
PROCEDURES
Received
in jinulform
27 July 1994.
154
Technical Note
x-y-z rotation sequence) were then calculated. A threedimensional inverse dynamic solution (Bresler and Frankel,
1950) was performed commencing with the most distal joint
(ankle). Mechanical joint powers were calculated from the
dot product of the joint angular velocities and joint moments
transformed in the global reference system (Robertson and
Winter, 1980). The time integral of the power curves (i.e.
work) was calculated (a) over one stride and (b) for each
power phase (two consecutive zero crossings). The work done
under each power phase was labelled by the joint (H = hip, K
= knee and A = ankle) followed by the plane@ = sagittal, F
= frontal and T = transverse) (eg. HI-S is the work done by
the hip joint for one of the power phases in the sagittal plane).
The total work over the stride was the sum of the positive
work and the absolute value of the negative work. Joint
moment and power profiles were normalized on a time base
of 100% stride and were ensemble-averaged across trials and
subjects.
RESULTS
0.76
f
a
Frontal
0.00
la.
-0.40
-1.50
1
0
20
40
50
50
100
-0.550
20
40
50
50
100
Hi-T
I
0
20
40
50
DO
100
2.1
5
u
0.0
20
40
50
X of Strld,
50
100
20
40-
X of
5;
DO
'
Stride
Fig. 1. Hip joint moments and joint powers normalized to body mass in the frontal, transverse and sagittal
planes. The dashed line indicates one standard deviation above and below the mean. Consistent hip moment
and power profiles were found in all planes except for the transverse joint power.
100
Technical
Table
1. Means
and standard
Sagittal
Ankle
Knee
Hip
deviations
Note
of the work
Frontal
(J kg- ) over
one stride
Transverse
gent
abs
gen
abs
0.42
(0.09)*
0.11
(0.052)
0.48
(0.12)
0.10
(0.05)
0.35
(0.094)
0.14
(0.053)
0.015
(0.008)
0.035
(0.013)
0.092
(0.03)
0.014
(0.007)
0.026
(0.012)
0.10
(0.05)
*Standard
deviations
in parentheses,
N = 9 subjects.
tgen = energy generation,
abs = energy absorption.
Note: The hip joint performs substantial
work in the frontal
abs
en
0.005
(0.003)
0.008
(0.004)
0.009
(0.005)
0.006
(0.002)
0.015
(0.01)
0.022
(0.013)
Total
f3en
Total
abs
Total
0.44
0.12
0.56
0.15
0.39
0.54
0.58
0.26
0.84
plane
Frontal
;fj(2-F
2d.
-030
I
0
20
40
20
40
00
90
90
90
100
Transverse
1.2 ,U,O-s
,,:
: :
0 8
k
8
s
u
Sagittrl
0.0 -
2c.
-0.75
0
20
A0
00
X of Slrldr
80
K&S
-2.1
I
100
2f.
1
X of Strldr
100
156
Technical Note
ODO
-0.15
-0.2s
20
40
80
80
100
3d
-I
20
40
80
80
100
20
40
00
80
100
0.010 ,
0.000
-0.050
,
-3
20
40
10
80
COO
8.0 ,
2.00 -9
AZ-S
,",
-0.50
3C.
;,
2b
40'
X of Strldr
80'
io
160
I
0
20
40
60
10
% of Strld,
Fig. 3. Ankle joint moments and joint powers normalized to body mass in the frontal, transverse and
sagittal planes. The dashed line indicates one standard deviation above and below the mean. Large
variability was found in the frontal moment and frontal and transverse powers.
100
?i
Technical Note
- 0.096 & 0.04 J kg- ) and then concentrically generated a
rapid push-off (A2-S generation: 0.39 + 0.082 J kg-) which
was the single largest generation phase of all the joints
[Fig. 3(f)]. In the frontal plane, all subjects had an evertor
moment at heel contact. Eight of the subjects then switched
to an invertor moment during midstance. During the propulsive phase, seven of the subjects exhibited an evertor moment
while two exhibited an invertor moment. The power phases
were small and highly variable for both the transverse and
frontal planes [Fig. 3(d) and (e)].
DISCUSSION
There are a number of variables (e.g. temporal, kinematic,
kinetic) that may be used to identify a characteristic pattern
during gait, but the mechanical power profile is the only
single variable which reveals the functional role of the
anatomical structures as they shorten or lengthen under
tension. Furthermore, the time integral of each power phase
(i.e. work) is a unique variable in that it quantifies, with a
single value, specific functions during the gait cycle.Although
work and power are scalar terms, the work was partitioned
into three arbitrary planes to facilitate the functional interpretation of specific events. A limitation of this technique is
that the work calculations will be underestimated if there is
simultaneous activity of the agonist and antagonist muscle
groups (i.e. co-contraction).
One would expect some variability of the results between
different investigators because of the location and orientation
of the principal axes of each segment and the location of the
joint centres. Nevertheless, the joint moment profiles were
consistent among the nine subjects and in general agreement
with other investigators (Andriacchi and Strickland, 1985;
Apkarian et a[., 1989). The exception was the ankle frontal
moment. The maximum ankle frontal moment in this study
was 1.5Nm compared to the 35-45 Nm magnitudes reported by other investigators (Andriacchi and Strickland,
1985; Apkarian et al., 1989; Kadaba et al., 1989). Since the
vertical ground reaction force virtually dominates the ankle
frontal moment during stance and the centre of pressure is
limited to about + 3 cm within either side of the ankle joint,
the maximum frontal moment cannot exceed 24 N m. in a
subject who generates a vertical ground reaction force of
800 N. Larger values may be a result oferrors in the location
of the ML joint centre or the centre of pressure. A 1 cm error
in the ankle joint location can reverse the polarity of the
moment arm of the centre of pressure to the ankle joint
centre. Some of the variability of the ankle moments may also
be a result of anatomical differences in foot structure, the
amount of toeing in or out, or the initial foot placement.
MacKinnon and Winter (1993) found that the ankle frontal
moments reflect a control strategy to fine tune the medial
acceleration of the body mass during single support.
The sagittal work values were similar to the results of
planar studies which used similar cadences (Winter, 1983,
1991; Winter et al., 1990b) except the HI-S and H2-S work
values were larger than those previously reported. These
discrepancies are probably due to the fact that this study
examined the thigh segment relative to the pelvis segment
while previous planar studies examined the thigh segment
relative to the trunk segment. Minor differences may also be
a result of projection errors which can occur in a planar
analysis or from the fact that the planar studies used joint
moments calculated about the greater trochanter. The hip
joint centre reconstructed from the anatomical landmarks
selected in this study was a maximum of 1.9 cm posterior to
the greater trochanter in the first half of stance, and 1.8 cm
anterior to the greater trochanter in the second half. Hence,
the estimated hip joint coordinate would result in larger
moment, power and work values. The relationship we found
between the trajectory of the hip joint centre and a greater
REFERENCES
Rehabk
72, 3091314.
758
Technical Note
Gait: Normal,
Elderly
and Motor
and Pathological.
Control
of
University
Organization
(Edited by Winters, J. M.
and Woo, S. L. -Y.), pp. 680-693. Springer, New York.
Winter, D. A., Patla, A. E., Frank, J. S. and Walt, S. E. (1990b)
Biomechanical walking pattern changes in the fit and
healthy elderly. Phys. Ther. 70, 340-347.
its and Movement