This article was downloaded by: [Majumdar, Deepti] On: 21 May 2010 Access details: Access Details: [subscription

number 922482728] Publisher Taylor & Francis Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 3741 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Ergonomics

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713701117

Effects of military load carriage on kinematics of gait

Deepti Majumdar a; Madhu Sudan Pal a;Dhurjati Majumdar a a Defence Institute of Physiology and Allied Sciences, Defence Research & Development Organisation, Ministry of Defence, Government of India, Lucknow Road, Delhi, India Online publication date: 21 May 2010

To cite this Article Majumdar, Deepti , Pal, Madhu Sudan andMajumdar, Dhurjati(2010) 'Effects of military load carriage

on kinematics of gait', Ergonomics, 53: 6, 782 791 To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/00140131003672015 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00140131003672015

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Ergonomics Vol. 53, No. 6, June 2010, 782791

Eects of military load carriage on kinematics of gait

Deepti Majumdar, Madhu Sudan Pal and Dhurjati Majumdar*
Defence Institute of Physiology and Allied Sciences, Defence Research & Development Organisation, Ministry of Defence, Government of India, Lucknow Road, Delhi - 110054, India (Received 30 May 2008; nal version received 29 December 2009) Manual load carriage is a universal activity and an inevitable part of the daily schedule of a soldier. Indian Infantry soldiers carry loads on the waist, back, shoulders and in the hands for a marching order. There is no reported study on the eects of load on gait in this population. It is important to evaluate their kinematic responses to existing load carriage operations and to provide guidelines towards the future design of heavy military backpacks (BPs) for optimising soldiers performance. Kinematic changes of gait parameters in healthy male infantry soldiers whilst carrying no load (NL) and military loads of 4.217.5 kg (6.527.2% body weight) were investigated. All comparisons were conducted at a self-selected speed. Soldier characteristics were: mean (SD) age 23.3 (2.6) years; height 172.0 (3.8) cm; weight 64.3 (7.4) kg. Walk trials were collected using a 3-D Motion Analysis System. Results were subjected to one-way ANOVA followed by Dunnett post hoc test. There were increases in step length, stride length, cadence and midstance with the addition of a load compared to NL. These ndings were resultant of an adaptive phenomenon within the individual to counterbalance load eect along with changes in speed. Ankle and hip ranges of motion (ROM) were signicant. The ankle was more dorsiexed, the knee and hip were more exed during foot strike and helped in absorption of the load. The trunk showed more forward leaning with the addition of a load to adjust the centre of mass of the body and BP system back to the NL condition. Signicant increases in ankle and hip ROM and trunk forward inclination (108) with lighter loads, such as a BP (10.7 kg), BP with rie (14.9 kg) and BP with a light machine gun (17.5 kg), may cause joint injuries. It is concluded that the existing BP needs design improvisation specically for use in low intensity conict environments. Statement of Relevance: The present study evaluates spatial, temporal and angular changes at trunk and limb joints during military load carriage of relatively lighter magnitude. Studies on similar aspects on the specic population are limited. These data can be used for optimising load carriage and designing ensembles, especially a heavy BP, for military operations. Keywords: angular displacement; kinematics; load carriage; ROM

Downloaded By: [Majumdar, Deepti] At: 16:41 21 May 2010

1.

Introduction

A strenuous military load march is associated with many injuries and the factors commonly implicated in these injuries include load, excessive fatigue, terrain, footwear and distance travelled during marching (Knapik et al. 1997). Over the years, extensive research has been conducted to examine the physiological responses of various load carriage operations (Datta and Ramanathan 1971, Datta et al. 1973, Haisman 1988, Legg et al. 1992). Although a number of reported studies on kinematics of gait exist, those particularly on military load carriage are less prominent (Martin and Nelson 1986, Harman et al. 1994, 2000a, Knapik et al. 1996, 2004). As for the Indian military population, no reported data on kinematics of load carriage are presently available. The anthropometric dimensions of a population (e.g. stature, limb lengths and breadths, body weight (BW) and body composition, etc.) serve as important determinants of load carriage
*Corresponding author. Email: majum55@yahoo.com
ISSN 0014-0139 print/ISSN 1366-5847 online 2010 Taylor & Francis DOI: 10.1080/00140131003672015 http://www.informaworld.com

ability of that population (Haisman 1988, Knapik et al. 1996, 1997). Body dimensions related to height (e.g. stature, sitting height, etc.) and hip breadth are most critical in describing international variations (Sangdon and Ramus 2008). Sizing surveys by dierent countries (SizeUK, SizeUSA, SizeMexico, SizeThailand, etc.) indicate that the ethnic variability of body size and body dimensions cannot be overlooked while evaluating the load carriage capacity of a particular population (Garn 1992). The variations in physical characteristics between Indians and Westerners are known (Davies et al. 1980, Frisancho 1981, Al-Obaidi et al. 2003, Ryu et al. 2006). It is expected that these variations may also aect the kinematic responses of gait during load carriage operations more in an Indian population than Westerners. To the best of the present authors knowledge, at present, Indian soldiers do not use a heavy backpack (BP) on level ground. Diculties in

Ergonomics extrapolation of Western data on load carriage for an Indian population and lack of any data on this activity in an Indian military population led the authors to investigate the kinematic responses of gait during load carriage operations in Indian soldiers and to identify the expected dierences in these responses with regard to existing data of other populations. Biomechanical changes while carrying loads of varying magnitudes in the support phase of gait were studied by Kinoshita (1985) at a controlled speed of walking (4.5 + 0.3 km/h) using two dierent load carrying ensembles, viz., BP and doublepack. His subjects were unskilled healthy males who carried loads of 20% and 40% of BW. He observed that the subjects preferred to walk at a slower speed using a shorter stride length while carrying heavy loads. While studying the eects of load and walking speed on 12 subjects who walked on a treadmill at varying speeds (2.25.8 km/h) with and without a BP containing 40% BW, LaFiandra et al. (2003) observed that the increase in hip excursion was not sucient to fully compensate the decrease in pelvic rotation and therefore caused shorter stride length and an increase in cadence to maintain a constant walking speed. Very recently, Attwells et al. (2006) studied the eect of carrying 8, 16, 40 and 50 kg loads on military personnel. In their study, spatiotemporal changes were found to be unrelated to angular changes of motion, and knee and hip ranges of motion (ROM) increased with load. They observed that the trunk exed forward with the increased forward position of the head with increase in load. They concluded that the head functioned in concert with the trunk to counterbalance the load. The above studies indicate that postural changes during load carriage may ultimately culminate in some recordable changes in kinematic parameters. These changes play an important role in deciding an individuals gait pattern and may help to quantify joint kinematic stress under such conditions. As gait is a balanced operation, any variation in gait parameters may lead to excess metabolic demand and early fatigue. Military load carriage involves carrying loads of dierent shapes and sizes on dierent parts of the body, e.g. back, waist, hand and shoulder. The distribution of these items is mostly unequal and may lead to an alteration in gait parameters (Martin and Nelson 1986, Harman et al. 1994, 2000a, Attwells et al. 2006). Quantication of these changes in postures and gait mechanics of military personnel while carrying loads may have implications in the future design of equipment and load carriage ensembles. The magnitudes of load in the previous studies were much higher than the load mostly carried by Indian Infantry soldiers. They carry essential military and personal

783

items in a haversack (HS, 4.4 kg) at the waist, BP (10.7 kg) and INSAS rie (4.2 kg) or light machine gun (LMG, 6.8 kg) in the hand. The eectiveness of a lighter and compact load in comparison to a heavier load carriage in improving the soldiers performance in short and intense war situations, as in low intensity conict environments, needs to be evaluated to assess their resultant stress eect. The present study was designed to investigate whether carriage of these items as single units or in combination (HSRie, HSLMG, BPRie and BPLMG) causes any alteration in kinematic parameters of gait of the soldiers while they walked at a comfortable speed on level ground and to provide necessary directions towards the future design of heavy military BPs in order to optimise the soldiers performance. 2. Methodology

Downloaded By: [Majumdar, Deepti] At: 16:41 21 May 2010

2.1. Subjects In total, 10 randomly selected healthy male infantry soldiers, without any previous history of musculoskeletal disorders or fractures volunteered for the study. Their mean (SD) age, height and weight were 23.3 (2.6) years, 172.0 (3.8) cm and 64.3 (7.4) kg, respectively. Subjects were given necessary information regarding the experimental procedure and they signed informed consent before commencement of the study. 2.2. Experimental protocol

The Ethics Committee of the Institute approved the experimental protocol. Accordingly, subjects were rst accustomed to gait laboratory and gait data collection procedure prior to starting the experiment. Then anthropometric data of each subject were recorded, which included BW (while wearing only underwear and military boots), height, right and left foot lengths and widths. For each subject, the left and right static trials and walk trials with no load (NL) and load carriage manoeuvres were collected on the same day. About 20 min interval was allowed between the two experimental conditions to overcome the fatigue eect. Six camera-based 3-D HiRes Expert Vision Systems of M/s (Motion Analysis Corporation, Santa Rosa, CA, USA) were used for collecting video data. A set of 25 Cleveland Clinic (Cleveland, OH, USA) retro-reective surface markers was used for full body dynamic trials. Subjects wore only underwear and military boots during the experiment. Each subject was rst asked to walk in the laboratory at his own comfortable pace before starting the experiment on a 10 m walkway, when the speed was

784

D. Majumdar et al. (Motion Analysis Corporation, Santa Rosa, CA, USA) and subsequently exported to Orthotrak 6.26 software (Motion Analysis Corporation, Santa Rosa, CA, USA) for nal processing. The trials showing any distortion due to marker drop-out, obscuring or equipment failure were rejected even though such occurrences were rare. For each subject, four to ve good tracks were nally selected for each condition and subsequently normalised for statistical analysis. 2.3. Parameters studied Mean (SD) values for walking speed, spatial and temporal parameters and angular displacements were computed. Spatial parameters recorded were step length (cm), stride length (cm) and cadence (steps/min). Temporal parameters, recorded as % of gait cycle were total support time (TST), initial double support time (IDST), single support time (SST), midstance (MST) and swing phase. In the sagittal plane, angular changes for ankle, knee, hip and trunk at dierent events of gait cycle (foot strike, MST and toe-o) were recorded and the ROM for these joints in normalised gait cycle for each load condition were calculated. 2.4. Statistical treatment One-way ANOVA using Statistical Package for Social Sciences for Windows (Release 10.0.1; SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) was performed on all the spatial, temporal, angular parameters and ROM to nd out overall signicant changes in the data. After ANOVA rejected the hypothesis of equality of the means for dierent load conditions, Dunnett post hoc test for pairwise comparison of the signicant main eect against the reference group (NL) was applied and changes at p 5 0.05 were considered signicant. 3. Results

noted. The subject was required to try and maintain that particular pace throughout the experiment. The walking speed of the subject in the beginning, middle and end of the capture volume, which was about 3 m (common area of view for six cameras for recording gait data), was monitored by three pairs of infrared photoelectric cells placed 1.5 m apart from each other (Birrell et al. 2007). The speed at which the subjects walked comfortably for dierent load carriage operations ranged from 0.97 to 1.1 m/s. The initial point of gait capture volume was about 3.5 m away from the starting point of the gait walkway. This distance and controlled walking speed eliminated any eect of acceleration/deceleration that could aect gait parameters while walking on the 10 m walkway during data collection. They walked under controlled laboratory conditions on level ground for about 1520 min in each condition, rst without load and subsequently carrying eight dierent loads, which ranged from 4.2 kg, which was 6.5% of the mean BW to 17.5 kg, that is, 27.2% of mean BW. Dierent load conditions were administered randomly to the subjects to avoid any order eect. Table 1 gives the details about the load carriage operations undertaken. The load carriage combinations were designed to simulate some of the important load carriage activities normally carried out by Indian Infantry soldiers. However, all load carriage operations that are normally carried out during marching order in a eld situation could not be administered due to the possibility of marker obscuration. Under these conditions, subjects were asked to carry a LMG or INSAS rie in their right hand as is commonly practised by the soldiers in their normal work environment. At least 10 trials were collected for each subject in each condition. Collected trials were then tracked and edited using Eva7.0 software
Table 1. Dierent load magnitude (kg) involved in load carriage operations and their representation as % of mean body weight (64.3+7.4 kg) of subjects (n 10). Load conditions 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. No load INSAS rie (loaded) in right hand Haversack with its contents Light machine gun (loaded) in right hand Haversack and INSAS rie (loaded) in right hand Backpack with its contents Haversack and light machine gun (loaded) in right hand Backpack and INSAS rie (loaded) in right hand Backpack and light machine gun (loaded) in right hand Load (kg) 0.0 4.2 4.4 6.8 8.6 10.7 11.2 14.9 17.5 % of body weight 0.0 6.5 6.8 10.6 13.4 16.6 17.4 23.2 27.2

Downloaded By: [Majumdar, Deepti] At: 16:41 21 May 2010

Right and left side spatiotemporal parameters, joint angular displacements and ROM were studied. No signicant dierence in the right and left side data was observed. Hence, only right side data are presented as per convention. 3.1. Spatial and temporal parameters

The mean (SD) values of spatial and temporal parameters are given in Table 2. All the spatial parameters increased with increase of load in the eight load carriage conditions studied. However, the increase was not consistent in relation to the changes in load magnitude and was not signicant. The

Ergonomics
Table 2. Load conditions (kg) NL (0.0) R (4.2) HS (4.4) LMG (6.8) HSR (8.6) BP (10.7) HSLMG (11.2) BPR (14.9) BPLMG (17.5) Changes in mean (SD) spatial and temporal parameters during military load carriage (n 10). Speed (m/s) 0.97 1.03 1.03 1.0 1.09 1.06 1.11 1.09 1.11 (0.08) (0.05) (0.02) (0.06) (0.06) (0.07) (0.03) (0.04) (0.07) Step length (cm) 71.6 72.7 73.5 72.9 74.3 72.5 74.5 73.6 74.0 (5.4) (6.3) (9.9) (5.3) (8.5) (8.8) (6.7) (8.1) (8.5) Stride length (cm) 142.8 144.2 146.8 143.8 147.8 144.7 146.0 145.2 145.1 (8.7) (10.7) (18.1) (9.3) (17.5) (15.0) (10.2) (14.7) (14.9) Cadence (steps/min) 95.6 97.5 97.0 97.6 97.2 97.0 98.7 96.7 98.3 (7.0) (6.0) (6.1) (5.7) (7.2) (6.4) (6.0) (6.7) (5.4) TST (%) 58.9 58.9 58.4 58.7 59.2 59.2 58.9 59.3 59.1 (1.3) (1.0) (1.3) (0.6) (1.2) (0.8) (1.0) (1.1) (1.1) IDST (%) 8.6 9.1 8.5 9.0 9.1 9.3 8.9 9.5 9.3 (1.0) (0.9) (1.6) (0.8) (1.4) (1.1) (1.4) (0.9) (1.1) MST{ (%) 22.7 24.1* 23.1 24.4* 24.5* 23.5 24.7* 24.1 24.7* (2.2) (1.4) (1.8) (1.2) (1.0) (1.4) (1.2) (1.6) (1.3) SST (%) 41.2 41.2 41.7 41.2 41.3 40.8 41.2 40.8 41.0 (1.4) (0.9) (1.3) (0.9) (1.1) (1.3) (1.2) (1.4) (1.4)

785

Swing phase (%) 41.1 41.1 41.6 41.3 40.8 40.8 41.1 40.7 40.9 (1.3) (1.0) (1.3) (0.6) (1.2) (0.8) (1.0) (1.1) (1.1)

TST total support time; IDST initial double support time; MST midstance; SST single support time; NL no load; R rie; HS haversack; LMG light machine gun; BP backpack. * Signicance at p 5 0.05 in Dunnett post hoc test. { Overall signicance in one-way ANOVA.

Downloaded By: [Majumdar, Deepti] At: 16:41 21 May 2010

maximum increase in step length and cadence was 2.9 cm and 3.1 steps/min, respectively, observed during the HSLMG (11.2 kg) condition compared to NL. Similarly, the maximum increase in stride length was 5.0 cm during the HSRie (8.6 kg) condition against NL. Among temporal parameters, MST showed an overall trend of signicant increase when one-way ANOVA was applied. Post-hoc analysis of data showed that changes in MST were signicant whenever the rie or LMG was carried in the hand, either singly or in combination with HS or BP. Increases in TST and IDST were not signicant and inconsistent with increase in load. The SST and swing phase in any load carriage conditions remained more or less unchanged compared to NL condition. 3.2. Angular displacements Ankle, knee, hip and trunk angles at foot strike, MST and toe-o in the sagittal plane are given in Table 3. Figure 1 describes the angular displacements of the above joints in a normalised gait cycle during load carriage operations in the sagittal plane for the right side of the body. 3.2.1. Foot strike At foot strike, an overall signicant change in ankle dorsiexion and knee and trunk exion was observed. The ankle became more dorsiexed from 6.6 (1.1)8 at NL to 7.1 (1.4)8 at BPLMG. Changes in this joint for other conditions remained unrelated to load magnitude. The knee tended to become more exed from 4.8 (0.7)8 at NL to 5.5 (0.9)8 at BPLMG (17.5 kg). With the addition of load, a trend of increase in knee

exion was seen. Hip angle showed an increase in exion with addition of load but these changes were not signicant. Trunk showed an upright posture, 71.6 (0.3)8 at NL and with addition of load it became more inclined towards the anterior side, maximum exion being 9.1(1.8)8 at BPLMG (17.5 kg). 3.2.2. Midstance At MST, an overall signicant change in ankle dorsiexion and trunk exion was observed. A maximum increase in ankle dorsiexion by 38 was observed with BP (10.7 kg). The trunk was more upright with 72.5 (0.5)8 at NL and with addition of load it showed a trend of increase in forward inclination. Compared to NL, it attained a maximum exion of 9.58 at BPLMG (17.5 kg). No specic changes in knee and hip joint angles were observed at this event in the dierent load conditions. 3.2.3. Toe-o

At toe-o, an overall signicant increase in hip extension and trunk exion was observed. The hip showed an extension of 1.7 (0.3)8 at NL and a trend of increase in extension was observed with increase in load magnitude. The maximum hip extension to the extent of 128 occurred at BPLMG (17.5 kg) compared to NL. In all load conditions, hip extension angle changed maximally just before toe-o (Figure 1). A post-hoc test revealed a signicant increase in hip extension for all load conditions at LMG (6.8 kg) and above compared to NL. As at foot strike and MST, the trunk showed more forward inclination at toe-o compared to NL as load increased. A maximum trunk exion of about 8.98 was observed at BP

786
(0.5) (0.3) (0.2) (0.5) (0.1) (1.2) (0.3) (1.1) (1.0) Angular changes in mean (SD) degrees in sagittal plane of dierent joints at dierent events of normalised gait cycle during military load carriage (n 10). TO{

D. Majumdar et al. (10.7 kg) compared to NL. The increase in trunk forward inclination was not linear to the increase in load magnitude. In each load condition, at toe-o, the ankle transited rapidly from dorsiexion to plantar exion, providing the push-o energy for propulsion. However, at this event, the ankle was found to remain more dorsiexed with added load compared to NL. Knee angle remained more extended than NL with the addition of load. 3.2.4. Ranges of motion Table 4 gives ankle, knee, hip and trunk ROM in each load condition. There was an overall signicant change in ankle ROM and hip ROM. Increases in ankle ROM in HSRie, BP, BPRie and BPLMG were found to be signicant compared to NL. Ankle ROM increased by 48 maximally at HSRie when compared to NL. This change in ROM may have occurred due to an increased dorsiexion at foot strike, MST and toe-o of the stance phase and increase in ankle plantarexion during the initial swing phase in the gait cycle. Among the nine load conditions studied (including NL), the maximum value of knee ROM (73.3 + 3.6)8 was obtained at HSLMG and minimum value (69.6 + 4.5)8 at NL, resulting in a maximum increase in knee ROM of 3.78. This increase in knee ROM was probably due to increased exion at foot strike and increase in extension at toe-o and at the end of the swing phase. Hip ROM increased maximally by about 7.88 in the BPLMG condition compared to NL and the change was signicant. This increase in ROM occurred due to an increase in hip exion at foot strike and during the middle of the swing phase and a greater extension before toe-o (Figure 1). Trunk ROM increased maximally by 1.18 compared to NL in the HSLMG condition. With the addition of each load, the trunk became more exed forward at the beginning of the gait cycle, thus reducing any change in ROM. 4. Discussion The present study aimed to investigate the eects of carrying military load carriage ensembles, particularly HS and BP, rie and LMG on kinematic parameters of gait. It is normally hypothesised that walking with load will aect the gait pattern. However, Hong and Cheung (2003) did not nd any change in temporal and spatial parameters when school children aged 910 years carried a BP load of 20% BW. Pascoe et al. (1997) observed that carrying a standard book BP

Trunk

MST{ FS
{

(0.3) (0.9) (0.6) (0.7)* (1.1)* (1.3)* (1.8)* (2.4)* (2.7)* NL R (4.2) HS (4.4) LMG (6.8) HSR (8.6) BP (10.7) HSLMG (11.2) BPR (14.9) BPLMG (17.5) 6.6 6.5 6.2 5.0 5.2 6.3 6.3 6.3 7.1 (1.1) (1.1) (0.5) (1.0)* (0.9)* (0.9) (1.0) (1.1) (1.4) 9.2 8.9 9.0 9.0 9.0 12.2 10.2 10.8 10.3 (1.9) (1.8) (1.8) (1.7) (1.8) (2.3)* (2.1) (2.2) (2.0) 11.9 12.4 14.8 11.1 13.2 13.4 12.2 13.3 12.9 (2.3) (2.5) (2.8) (1.9) (2.6) (2.3) (2.3) (2.6) (2.6) 4.8 5.5 4.7 4.9 3.4 5.1 4.6 5.5 5.5 (0.7) (1.1) (0.8) (0.8) (0.7)* (1.0) (0.9) (1.1) (0.9) 19.6 18.4 20.0 18.2 18.7 18.6 19.2 19.8 18.0 (3.2) (3.6) (1.1) (3.3) (3.7) (3.8) (3.1) (3.8) (3.1) 34.7 33.0 30.6 34.0 32.6 31.6 33.7 31.1 30.9 (7.5) (6.3) (4.9) (4.8) (6.7) (6.1) (4.3) (5.8) (5.1) 30.2 31.0 32.8 30.1 31.8 32.2 32.3 32.1 32.2 (5.6) (6.1) (4.6) (5.6) (5.1) (6.2) (5.8) (6.4) (6.5) 20.0 18.5 21.1 18.6 18.6 20.8 18.8 20.1 22.5 (3.0) (3.7) (3.6) (3.8) (3.5) (4.2) (3.8) (3.4) (3.2) 71.7 72.9 73.2 73.6 75.6 77.2 78.6 711.8 713.7

71.6 2.8 3.0 3.8 4.4 8.7 7.4 9.1 9.1

FS foot strike; MST midstance; TO toe o; NL no load; R rie; HS haversack; LMG light machine gun; BP backpack. *Signicance at p 5 0.05 in Dunnett post hoc test. { Overall signicance in one-way ANOVA.

Hip

Downloaded By: [Majumdar, Deepti] At: 16:41 21 May 2010

Knee

Ankle

Load conditions (kg)

Table 3.

FS

MST

TO

FS

MST

TO

FS

MST

TO

(0.3) (0.5)* (0.6)* (0.7)* (0.8)* (1.6)* (1.1)* (1.8)* (1.8)*

72.5 71.5 1.7 2.1 2.4 6.1 2.8 6.8 7.0

(0.5) (0.2)* (0.3)* (0.4)* (0.4)* (1.2)* (0.6)* (1.0)* (1.4)*

72.3 71.7 71.1 72.7 0.6 6.6 71.6 5.7 5.9

Ergonomics
Table 4. The ranges of motion in mean (SD) degrees in sagittal plane of dierent joints in normalised gait cycle during military load carriage (n 10). Load conditions (kg) NL R (4.2) HS (4.4) LMG (6.8) HSR (8.6) BP (10.7) HSLMG (11.2) BPR (14.9) BPLMG (17.5) Ankle{ 23.2 26.0 24.6 26.2 27.2 26.7 26.0 26.9 26.6 (2.0) (2.1) (1.2) (2.1) (2.7)* (2.0)* (1.9) (2.1)* (4.9)* Knee 69.6 72.3 71.3 71.4 71.8 71.9 73.3 70.7 70.7 (4.5) (2.93) (2.9) (5.6) (3.7) (2.4) (3.6) (3.3) (8.8) Hip{ 43.7 46.2 45.8 45.2 47.1 46.8 46.7 47.4 51.5 (3.2) (3.9) (5.0) (3.4) (5.2) (4.9) (4.2) (4.3) (4.4)*

787

Trunk 5.0 5.4 4.6 5.5 4.8 4.5 6.1 5.8 6.0 (1.7) (1.7) (1.7) (1.9) (1.2) (1.2) (2.1) (1.9) (3.0)

NL no load; R rie; HS haversack; LMG light machine gun; BP backpack. *Signicance at p 5 0.05 in Dunnett post hoc test. { Overall signicance in one-way ANOVA.

Downloaded By: [Majumdar, Deepti] At: 16:41 21 May 2010

Figure 1. Angular displacements of dierent joints in the sagittal plane during normalised gait cycle during military load carriage. MST midstance; TO toe-o; NL no load; R rie; HS haversack; LMG light machine gun; BP backpack.

signicantly decreased stride length and increased stride frequency in young individuals. For military load carriage, Attwells et al. (2006) observed that stride length and cadence increased in the webbing (16 kg) condition but decreased with higher loads (40 and 50 kg) in comparison to the control condition, where walking speed was self-paced. The changes in spatial parameters in the webbing condition compared to the

other conditions were explained as due to an increase of walking speed in this condition. In the present study, step length, stride length and cadence increased with addition of load irrespective of their mode of carriage. The maximum increase in step length (2.9 cm) and cadence (3.1 steps/min) occurred at HSLMG (11.2 kg) and the stride length increased maximally by 5 cm in the HSRie (8.6 kg) condition against NL.

788

D. Majumdar et al. A signicant delay in occurrence of MST as compared to NL was observed in this study when a rie or LMG was carried in the hand, as a single unit or in combination with HS or BP, although these changes were quite small (1.4 2.0%) and unrelated to load magnitude. Holding and carrying a rie or LMG sideways in the hand restricted the natural arm swing pattern and could alter the basal spatiotemporal gait pattern by reducing preferred velocity (Eke-Okoro et al. 1997). Natural arm swing is known to counterbalance horizontal rotation of the trunk and modulate vertical excursion of the bodys centre of mass (CoM). Carrying a rie of 4.4 kg with both hands in the anterior side of the body had been found to increase impact peak and mediolateral forces, resulting in an increase in vertical and horizontal ROM of the bodys CoM (Birrell and Haslam 2008). It is suggested that the delay in MST in the present study could have resulted from an increase in the ROM of the bodys CoM, restricted arm swing and placement of load below waist level. The major weight of a rie and LMG is located at the rear (butt) of these weapons, which possibly added in delaying the transfer of the whole body load from one leg to another during MST. The possible role of this phenomenon as injury potential is not known. The present study was intended to evaluate the changes in spatial, temporal and kinematic parameters of gait while carrying a lighter load, which in reality is practised frequently and regularly by soldiers in dierent operational conditions or even during their daily training schedule than when carrying a heavier load. Like heavier loads in previous studies, the lighter load also produced quantiable and signicant changes in spatiotemporal parameters in the present study. These changes may be considered as due to some adaptive phenomenon within the individual to counterbalance the load eect, together with the changes in speed. It is possible that the degree of adaptation will be more intense with a heavier load. This adaptive phenomenon has been explained by Fouad et al. (2001) as compensatory reex adaptations in response to the load. In this process, load information is used to modify the reex responses, including proprioreception signalling, so that a desirable and stable posture during walking is attained. Angular displacements in the sagittal plane have been reported in this study, as the changes in this plane were more pronounced, quantiable, comparable and have been discussed more frequently in most of the previous studies (Kinoshita 1985, Hong and Cheung 2003, Attwells et al. 2006). A signicant change in ankle ROM has been observed in this study. Harman et al. (2000b) stated that such change may be caused by an increase in stride length and walking speed.

In the present study, subjects were asked to walk at a self-selected comfortable speed. However, in spite of repeated instructions, they could not maintain the desired speed. It was observed that over-imposition and strictness on the maintenance of speed caused abnormal gait patterns of the soldiers. Their walking speed in this study increased with addition of each load and ranged between 0.97 m/s at NL and 1.11 m/s at BPLMG. The maximum load, BPLMG (17.5 kg), in the present study was comparable to the webbing load of Attwells et al. (2006) and the observed changes in spatial parameters with addition of load may be explained due to an increase in speed similar to Attwells et al. (2006). Harman et al. (2000b) stated that a change in speed results in a change in stride length and cadence. Previous studies indicated a decrease in stride length and an increase in cadence with an increase in load while walking at xed speed (Kinoshita 1985, Martin and Nelson 1986, Pascoe et al. 1997). The loads in question in these studies were quite heavier than in the present study. Harman et al. (1992) remained doubtful about the occurrence of similar phenomena with a self-selected walking pace as followed in the present study. In this study, it is possible, that with addition of each load, the subjects adjusted their posture by increasing their base of support, resulting in an increase of stride length. A simultaneous increase in the stride frequency might have helped in reducing the stress on the musculoskeletal system, thus improving load carriage eciency. The increase in stride length and stride frequency ultimately increased gait velocity. Danion et al. (2003) looked into stride variability of human gait as eects of stride length and cadence and their relation to walking speed. They concluded that stride length and cadence were two fundamental parameters resulting in gait variability and that, by manipulating stride length and cadence, consistency of stride could be inuenced. Changes in these parameters directly inuenced walking speed to a great extent. Consistency in stride called for larger steps, for which angular motions at ankle, knee and hip increased (Winter 1987) as observed in the present study. The small but distinct changes in spatial parameters in this study may be the result of the subjects attempt to maintain consistency in gait as a natural response to the gait variability during loaded walking (Danion et al. 2003). The present study stands apart from previous studies in that the dierences in magnitudes of loads between experimental conditions were smaller. It is possible that the magnitude of applied load, 6.527.2% of BW might be insucient to cause a substantial signicant change in spatial parameters when compared to the NL condition.

Downloaded By: [Majumdar, Deepti] At: 16:41 21 May 2010

Ergonomics An apparent relationship between the increase in walking speed and ankle ROM with regard to NL has been observed in the current study. Also, an increase in load is said to have caused an increase in dorsiexion of ankle at foot strike, MST and toe-o in this study (Attwells et al. 2006) and ankle plantarexion during the initial swing phase, causing an increased ankle ROM. This increased dorsiexion of the ankle facilitated greater knee exion, which further absorbed the impact forces at foot strike (Kinoshita 1985). The smaller load magnitude in the present study signicantly aected ankle dorsiexion throughout the stance phase, further helping in the load absorption and gait process. Rapid transit of the ankle from dorsiexion to plantarexion during toe-o at the initial swing, as observed in the present study, is said to be a passive phenomenon (Rose and Gamble 2006). This is a consequence of push-o power generation in the gastrocnemius-soleus muscle complex, which provides necessary propulsion to proceed into the swing phase (Cikajlo and Matjacic 2007). In the present context, the ankle response may be explained as due to an increase in load, gravity and inertia (Rose and Gamble 2006). With the addition of load, a signicant increase in knee exion at foot strike and an increase in knee extension at toe-o compared to NL was seen in the present study, resulting in an increase in knee ROM. Knee ROM increased maximally (3.78) at HSLMG but the trend of increase was not linear to the increase in load magnitude. Similar but greater increases in knee ROM were observed for heavier load conditions (Kinoshita 1985, Harman et al. 2000a,b, Attwells et al. 2006). As expected, the smaller load magnitude used in the present study caused lesser changes in knee ROM. It was suggested that the increased knee exion at foot strike is a protective measure, which helped to absorb impact forces (Attwells et al. 2006). Certain parameters (e.g. knee angles at foot strike, MST and toe-o, trunk ROM, etc.) as seen in Tables 3 and 4 show an angular variability of less than 18. This may be attributed to the positioning of markers, underlying skin movement and other experimental artefacts. Hip ROM in the present study increased almost linearly and signicantly during higher load conditions, with the maximum increase at BPLMG (17.5 kg) by 7.88 compared to NL. At foot strike, hip exion increased linearly and, just before toe-o, the hip extension angle increased linearly and signicantly with addition of load. Harman et al. (2000b) explained that an increase in load increased the degree of hip motion. The degree of increase in hip extension angle at BPLMG (13.78) compared to NL (1.78) was quite notable. The maximum applied load (17.5 kg) was less than the heavier load carriage in previous studies (Kinoshita

789

1985, Martin and Nelson 1986, Harman et al. 2000a,b, Attwells et al. 2006) in terms of the changes observed. However, the present study elicited similar results at much lower loads. This study described hip angle as its orientation relative to the rooms coordinate using helical angles, thus was independent of trunk inclination as in Harman et al. (2000a). The increase in hip motion may therefore be explained as due to an addition of load and increase in walking speed. According to Fiolkwoski et al. (2006), such changes in hip movement have the potential to aect the gait pattern of the person carrying load, especially after repetitive long-term use. The increase in dierent joint ROMs, especially ankle and hip, may cause an increase in joint moments and power absorption, which is always injurious to joint tissues (Knapik et al. 1996, Lloyd and Cooke 2000, Quesada et al. 2000). These injuries may result in muscle rupture, form a ssure in the intervertebral disc and cause micro trauma or tears in the soft tissues. These may lead to haemorrhage, oedema and inammatory reactions followed by tissue degeneration. This usually results in formation of scar tissue and may adversely aect the biomechanics of the individual, causing strain in all related structures of the body. The muscular pain that sets in may be caused by accumulation of metabolites from overuse, reduction in muscle blood ow or reex arc between structures of functional spinal unit innervated by nocioceptors and corresponding muscles (Garg and Kapellusch 2009). Forward lean of the trunk while carrying heavier loads has previously been reported by several researchers (Kinoshita 1985, Harman et al. 2000a,b, Attwells et al. 2006). Increase in load induced forward lean of trunk and is always necessary to counterbalance the hip moments and to stabilise the bodys CoM. An upright posture was considered more ecient when carrying load but it could inhibit forward advancement of the body with the load on the back (Kinoshita 1985, Martin and Nelson 1986, Pascoe et al. 1997). In the present study, a signicant increase in trunk forward inclination was associated with the BP, BPRie and BPLMG conditions, mainly involving a load carriage of 10.7 kg (16.6% of BW) and above. Grimmer et al. (2002) stated that even very light loads (310% of BW) could cause an increase in forward lean. It was observed from the present study that when a soldier carried BP, BPRie or BPLMG, he would try to adjust the CoM of the body and BP system back to that of the NL condition. This was achieved by forward inclination, helping the body to minimise the energy expenditure of load carriage and increase the eciency of walking process (Bloom and Woolhull-McNeal 1987). Chan and Andersson (1991) observed that carrying a BP induced deviations

Downloaded By: [Majumdar, Deepti] At: 16:41 21 May 2010

790

D. Majumdar et al. Increased joint angular changes, ROM and excess forward inclination of trunk due to use of BP and its combinations necessitates redesigning the BP for reducing the kinematic stress of the individual. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to express their gratitude to all the volunteers for their participation in the study. This research was funded by Defence Research and Development Organisation, Ministry of Defence, Government of India.

from natural postures and caused low back strain. The prolonged postural strain caused by the trunk, which was greatly displaced from its normal position, may lead to discomfort and muscular pain in the upper body and low back injury. Goh et al. (1998) found that the maintenance of stability and eective forward progression resulted in peak lumbosacral forces when subjects carried a load in a BP. The resultant forward inclination of about 108 or more in this study in the soldiers while carrying a BP, BPRie or BPLMG, which was a lighter load compared to the heavier loads studied earlier, was signicant. The injury potential of the BP needs to be further veried, especially in consideration of a soldier population. Excess forward exion while carrying such loads for longer duration may possibly be impeded by eccentric contraction of hamstrings and semispinalis muscles, which may result in fatigue and low back injury due to increased stress upon back muscles and discs (Attwells et al. 2006). Martin and Nelson (1986) observed that there was no signicant change in forward lean even with rucksack load as high as 34 kg. Therefore, it might be possible that the BP used in the present study was not properly designed, the load was not aptly distributed within the BP and was not snugly tted to the body, causing forward over-leaning of the back of the soldiers. Although smaller in magnitude, a signicant delay in occurrence of MST was observed in this study when the rie or LMG was carried in the hand, as a single unit or in combination with a HS or BP. At that point of time, the trunk also became signicantly exed and the degree of exion increased with addition of load. At MST when the body was transferring load from one leg to the other, a signicant increase in trunk forward lean indicated that, in order to counterbalance the load on the back, the subjects were moving their trunk anteriorly (Hong and Cheung 2003, Attwells et al. 2006). 5. Conclusions

References
Al-Obaidi, S., et al., 2003. Basic gait parameters: A comparison of reference data for normal subjects 20 to 29 years of age from Kuwait and Scandinavia. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, 40, 361366. Attwells, R.L., et al., 2006. Inuence of carrying heavy loads on soldiers posture, movements and gait. Ergonomics, 49, 15271537. Birrell, S.A. and Haslam, R.A., 2008. The inuence of rie carriage on the kinetics of human gait. Ergonomics, 51, 816826. Birrell, S.A., Hooper, R.H., and Haslam, R.A., 2007. The eect of military load carriage on ground reaction forces. Gait and Posture, 26, 611614. Bloom, D. and Woolhull-McNeal, A.P., 1987. Postural adjustments while standing with two types of loaded backpack. Ergonomics, 30, 14251430. Chan, D.B. and Andersson, G.B.J., 1991. Occupational biomechanics. 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Cikajlo, I. and Matjaic, Z., 2007. The inuence of boot c stiness on gait kinematics and kinetics during stance phase. Ergonomics, 50, 21712182. Danion, F., et al., 2003. Stride variability in human gait: the eect of stride frequency and stride length. Gait and Posture, 18, 6977. Datta, S.R., Chatterjee, B.B., and Roy, B.N., 1973. The relationship between energy expenditure and pulse rates with body weight and the load carried during load carrying on the level ground. Ergonomics, 16, 507513. Datta, S.R. and Ramanathan, N.L., 1971. Ergonomic comparison of seven modes of carrying loads on the horizontal plane. Ergonomics, 14, 269278. Davies, B.T., et al., 1980. A comparison of hand anthropometry of females in three ethnic groups. Ergonomics, 23, 179182. Eke-Okoro, S.T., Gregoric, M., and Larsson, L.E., 1997. Alterations in gait resulting from deliberate changes of arm-swing amplitude and phase. Clinical Biomechanics, 12, 516521. Fiolkwoski, P., et al., 2006. Changes in gait kinematics and posture with the use of a front pack. Ergonomics, 49, 885894. Fouad, K., Bastiaanse, C.M., and Dietz, V., 2001. Reex adaptations during treadmill walking with increased body load. Journal of Experimental Brain Research, 137, 133140. Frisancho, A.R., 1981. New norms for upper limb fat and muscle areas for assessment of nutritional status. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 34, 25402545. Garg, A. and Kapellusch, J.M., 2009. Application of biomechanics for prevention of work-related musculo-skeletal disorders. Ergonomics, 52, 3659.

Downloaded By: [Majumdar, Deepti] At: 16:41 21 May 2010

Load carriage is an important part of the daily operations for infantry soldiers. This study showed that a change in speed occurred during load carriage even at the desired self-selected speed of walk. This caused an increase in stride length and cadence. A delay in MST was noticed when the rie or LMG was carried in the hand, either singly or in combination with HS or BP. As with a heavier load, ankle dorsiexion, knee and hip exion during foot strike were also observed with lower loads. Trunk forward leaning increased with addition of load to counterbalance the shift of CoM of the body-BP system back to the NL condition. These changes can be attributed to some intrinsic adaptive phenomenon in the individual to counterbalance load eect and changes in speed.

Ergonomics
Garn, S.M., 1992. Sex dierences and ethnic/racial dierences in body size and body composition. In: B.M. Mariott and J. Grumstrup-Scott, eds. Body composition and physical tness. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 207220. Goh, J.H., Thambyyah, A., and Bose, K., 1998. Eects of varying backpack loads on peak forces in the lumbosacral spine during walking. Clinical Biomechanics, 13 (S1), S26S31. Grimmer, K., et al., 2002. Adolescent standing postural response to backpack loads: a randomized controlled experimental study. Biomedical Central Musculoskeletal Disorders, 3 (10). Haisman, M.F., 1988. Determinants of load carrying ability. Applied Ergonomics, 19, 111121. Harman, E., et al., 1992. The eects of gait timing, kinetics and muscle activity of various loads carried on back. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 24, S129. Harman, E., et al., 1994. Backpack vs. front-back pack: Dierent eects of load on walking posture. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 26, S140. Harman, E., et al., 2000a. The eects of backpack weight on the biomechanics of load carriage. Report No. 0014. Natick, MA: US Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine. Harman, E., et al., 2000b. The eects of walking speed on the biomechanics of backpack load carriage. Report No. 0020. Natick, MA: US Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine. Hong, Y. and Cheung, C., 2003. Gait and posture responses to backpack load during level walking in children. Gait and Posture, 17, 2833. Kinoshita, H., 1985. Eects of dierent loads and carrying systems on selected biomechanical parameters describing walking gait. Ergonomics, 28, 13471362. Knapik, J.J., Harman, E., and Reynolds, K., 1996. Load carriage using packs: A review of physiological, biomechanical and medical aspects. Applied Ergonomics, 27, 207216.

791

Downloaded By: [Majumdar, Deepti] At: 16:41 21 May 2010

Knapik, J.J., Reynolds, K., and Harman, E., 2004. Soldier load carriage: historical, physiological, biomechanical and medical aspects. Military Medicine, 169, 4556. Knapik, J.J., et al., 1997. Soldier performance and strenuous road marching: inuence of load mass and load distribution. Military Medicine, 162, 6267. LaFiandra, M., et al., 2003. How do load carriage and walking speed inuence trunk coordination and stride parameters? Journal of Biomechanics, 36, 8795. Legg, S.J., Ramsey, T., and Knowles, D.J., 1992. The metabolic cost of backpack and shoulder load carriage. Ergonomics, 35, 10631068. Lloyd, R. and Cooke, C.B., 2000. The oxygen consumption associated with unloaded walking and load carriage using two dierent backpack design. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 81, 486492. Martin, P.E. and Nelson, R.C., 1986. The eect of carried loads on the walking patterns of men and women. Ergonomics, 29, 11911202. Pascoe, D.D., et al., 1997. Inuence of carrying book bags on gait cycle and postures of youths. Ergonomics, 40, 631641. Quesada, P.M., et al., 2000. Biomechanical and metabolic eects of varying backpack loading on simulated marching. Ergonomics, 43 (3), 293309. Rose, J. and Gamble, J.G., 2006. Human walking. 3rd ed. Baltimore, MD: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. Ryu, T., et al., 2006. A comparison of gait characteristics between Korean and Western people for establishing Korean gait reference data. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 36, 10231030. Sangdon, L. and Ramus, B., 2008. Regional dierences in world human body dimensions: the multi-way analysis approach. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomic Science, 9, 325345. Winter, D.A., 1987. Biomechanics and motor control of human gait. Waterloo: University Press.