...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of science and medicine in sport >Comparison of methods for kinematic identification of footstrike and toe-off during overground and treadmill running.
【24h】

Comparison of methods for kinematic identification of footstrike and toe-off during overground and treadmill running.

机译:在地面和跑步机跑步过程中脚部运动和脚趾运动的运动学识别方法的比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

When analysing gait, the identification of the period of stance is often needed. Forceplates are typically used, but in their absence kinematic data can be employed. Five kinematic methods have been previously described in the literature. However, these methods have not been compared to each other for overground or treadmill running. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare these five kinematic methods of identifying the stance phase with vertical ground reaction force data both during overground and treadmill running. We recruited forty recreational runners (20 males) for this study. Twenty runners underwent an instrumented gait analysis during overground running, and twenty were tested during instrumented treadmill running. All runners ran at 3.35 m/s. Each kinematic method was compared with stance identified from the vertical ground reaction force (gold standard) for overground running. This method was then repeated for treadmill running. Two methods were found to be valid and reliable for determining footstrike. These were the time when the distal heel marker reached a minimum vertical position, and when the vertical velocity of this same marker changed from negative to positive. These methods had absolute errors that ranged from 22.4 ms to 24.6 ms for both modes of running. Toe-off was best identified using peak knee extension, with absolute errors of 4.9 ms for overground running and 5.2 ms for treadmill running. Utilising automated kinematic methods of determining stance will aid researchers studying running when forceplates are unavailable.
机译:在分析步态时,通常需要确定站立时间。通常使用测力板,但如果没有测力板,则可以使用运动学数据。先前已经在文献中描述了五种运动学方法。但是,这些方法尚未在地面或跑步机上相互比较。因此,本研究的目的是将这五种运动学方法在地面和跑步机运行过程中,利用垂直地面反作用力数据来比较识别姿态阶段的方法。我们招募了40名休闲跑步者(20名男性)进行这项研究。在地面跑步过程中,二十名跑步者进行了仪器步态分析,而在跑步机上进行了二十次测试。所有跑步者的速度为3.35 m / s。将每种运动学方法与从垂直地面反作用力(金标准)确定的用于地面行驶的姿态进行了比较。然后在跑步机上重复此方法。发现有两种方法可以有效地确定踩脚次数。这是远端脚跟标记达到最小垂直位置,并且同一标记的垂直速度从负变为正的时间。这些方法的两种运行方式的绝对误差范围为22.4毫秒至24.6毫秒。最好使用峰值膝关节伸展来识别脚趾,地面跑步绝对误差为4.9 ms,跑步机跑步绝对误差为5.2 ms。利用自动运动学方法来确定姿势将有助于研究人员研究无法使用测力板的情况。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号