Volume 6, Issue 4 ( Iranian Journal of Ergonomics 2019)
Iran J Ergon 2019, 6(4): 37-45 |
Back to browse issues page
Siavash Etemadi nejad1 
, Saed Ahmadi Ganjeh * 2, Jamshid Yazdani Charati3 , Seyed Esmaeil Hoseininejad4
, Saed Ahmadi Ganjeh * 2, Jamshid Yazdani Charati3 , Seyed Esmaeil Hoseininejad4
1- Associate Professor, Department of Occupational Health Engineering and Ergonomics, Faculty of Health, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran
2- MSC Student of Ergonomics, Occupational Health Engineering and Ergonomics, Faculty of Health, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran , saedahmadi1364@gmail.com
3- Associate Professor. Department of Biostatistics, Health Sciences Research Center, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran
4- Assistant Professor, Department of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, Faculty of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran
2- MSC Student of Ergonomics, Occupational Health Engineering and Ergonomics, Faculty of Health, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran , saedahmadi1364@gmail.com
3- Associate Professor. Department of Biostatistics, Health Sciences Research Center, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran
4- Assistant Professor, Department of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, Faculty of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran
Abstract: (6376 Views)
Introduction: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of unstable shoes on lower limb kinetic parameters of walking in healthy male students with different geometric shapes. Today, various shoes have been developed to reduce the effects of injury parameters and improve performance parameters for walking.
Methods: 20 of the healthy male lambs were selected 178.96 ± 3.92 cm, 27 ± 3 years old, 73.99 ± 6.6 kg and 42 (EU) number, in fourposition , domestic production unstable shoes , foreign Similar unstable shoes, regular control shoes, and barefoot, The Kinetic parameters associated with Lower limbs was evaluated by force plate while walking. To examine the significant statistical differences between dependent variables between the four conditions of foot cover , the general linear model and the analysis of variance with repeated data and / or Friedman in the case of normalization of data in the alpha level of 5% using software version 23 SPSS was used.
Results: In relation to the kenetic parameters of the lower extremity, there was no change in the peak Postereior Force and the peak active force in the case when there was a significant change in the peak passive force and peak anterior Force and and the free movment and loading rate.
Conculosion: The results indicate to the domestic production unstable shoes inefficiency in reducing the damage and increasing the comfort of the lower limbs.
Methods: 20 of the healthy male lambs were selected 178.96 ± 3.92 cm, 27 ± 3 years old, 73.99 ± 6.6 kg and 42 (EU) number, in four
Results: In relation to the kenetic parameters of the lower extremity, there was no change in the peak Postereior Force and the peak active force in the case when there was a significant change in the peak passive force and peak anterior Force and and the free movment and loading rate.
Conculosion: The results indicate to the domestic production unstable shoes inefficiency in reducing the damage and increasing the comfort of the lower limbs.
Type of Study: Review |
Subject:
Other Cases
Received: 2019/01/22 | Accepted: 2019/03/11 | ePublished: 2019/06/8
Received: 2019/01/22 | Accepted: 2019/03/11 | ePublished: 2019/06/8
References
1. Bancroft RJ, McDonough T, Shakespeare J, Lynas K. Orthotics. European Geriatric Medicine 2011; 2(2): 122:125. [DOI:10.1016/j.eurger.2010.07.006]
2. Ledoux WR, Hillstrom HJ. The distributed plantar vertical force of neutrally aligned and pes planus feet. Gait & posture. 2002; 15(1):1-9. [DOI:10.1016/S0966-6362(01)00165-5]
3. Zifchock RA, Davis I. A comparison of semi-custom and custom foot orthotic devices in high-and low-arched individuals during walking. Clinical biomechanics. 2008; 23(10):1287-93. [DOI:10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2008.07.008] [PMID]
4. Chapman J, Preece S, Braunstein B, Höhne A, Nester C, Brueggemann P, et al. Effect of rocker shoe design features on forefoot plantar pressures in people with and without diabetes. Clinical Biomechanics. 2013; 28(6):679-85. [DOI:10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2013.05.005] [PMID]
5. Chen YC, Lou SZ, Huang CY, Su FC. Effects of foot orthoses on gait patterns of flat feet patients. Clinical biomechanics. 2010;25(3):265-70.Denton JD. Light does not make right. Running times. 2005: 324, 78. [DOI:10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2009.11.007] [PMID]
6. Nigg B. Biomechanics of sport shoes. First edition. Topline printing Inc. Calgary, Alberta. 2010: 263-274. [Google Scholar]
7. Logan S, Hunter I, Hopkins JT, Feland JB, Parcell AC. Ground reaction force differences between running shoes, racing flats, and distance spikes in runners. Journal of sports science & medicine. 2010;9(1):147. [PMID] [PMCID]
8. Shultz R, Birmingham TB, Jenkyn TR. Differences in neutral foot positions when measured barefoot compared to in shoes with varying stiffnesses. Medical engineering & physics. 2011;33(10):1309-13. [DOI:10.1016/j.medengphy.2011.05.009] [PMID]
9. Bischof JE, Abbey AN, Chuckpaiwong B, Nunley JA, Queen RM. Three-dimensional ankle kinematics and kinetics during running in women. Gait & posture. 2010 Apr 1;31(4):502-5. [DOI:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2010.02.010] [PMID]
10. Lohman III EB, Sackiriyas KS, Swen RW. A comparison of the spatiotemporal parameters, kinematics, and biomechanics between shod, unshod, and minimally supported running as compared to walking. Physical Therapy in Sport. 2011;12(4):151-63. [DOI:10.1016/j.ptsp.2011.09.004] [PMID]
11. Kutzner I, Heinlein B, Graichen F, Bender A, Rohlmann A, Halder A, Beier A, Bergmann G. Loading of the knee joint during activities of daily living measured in vivo in five subjects. Journal of Biomechanics. 2010;43(11):2164-73. [DOI:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2010.03.046] [PMID]
12. Eslami M, Hoseini Nejad S.E, Gandomkar A, Jahedi V, Effect of unstable shoes on ground reaction force parameters during stance phase of running. Journal Researches in Sport Medicine and Technology. 2013;11(6):90-101. [Google Scholar]
13. Gandomkar A, Eslami M, Hoseini Nejad S.E, Jahedi V, Effect of unstable shoes on lower extremity joint power during stance phase of running. Razi Journal of Medical Sciences. 2014;21(124):54-63. [Google Scholar]
14. Tanaguchi M, Tateuchi H, Takeoka T, Ichihashi N. Kinematic and Kinetic Characteristics of Masai Barefoot Technology Footwear. Gait & Posture 2012; 35(4): 567-572. [DOI:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2011.11.025] [PMID]
15. Barrios JA, Heitkamp CA, Smith BP, Sturgeon MM, Suckow DW, Sutton CR. Three-dimensional hip and knee kinematics during walking, running, and single-limb drop landing in females with and without genu valgum. Clinical Biomechanics. 2016;31:7-11. [DOI:10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2015.10.008] [PMID]
16. Wiegerinck JI, Boyd J, Yoder JC, Abbey AN, Nunley JA, Queen RM. Differences in plantar loading between training shoes and racing flats at a self-selected running speed. Gait & posture. 2009; 29(3):514-9. [DOI:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2008.12.001] [PMID]
17. Zadpoor AA, Nikooyan AA. The relationship between lower-extremity stress fractures and the ground reaction force: a systematic review. Clinical biomechanics. 2011; 26(1):23-8. [DOI:10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2010.08.005] [PMID]
18. Grasso R, Bianchi L, Lacquaniti F. Motor patterns for human gait: backward versus forward locomotion. Journal of neurophysiology. 1998; 80(4):1868-85. [DOI:10.1152/jn.1998.80.4.1868] [PMID]
19. Fu SN, Hui-Chan CWY. Are there any relationships among ankle proprioception acuity, pre-landing ankle muscle responses, and landing impact in man? Neuroscience letters. 2007; 417(2):123-7. [DOI:10.1016/j.neulet.2007.01.068] [PMID]
20. Dufek JS. Exercise variability: A prescription for overuse injury prevention. ACSM's Health & Fitness Journal. 2002 ;6(4):18-23. [Google Scholar]
21. Ali N, Robertson DGE, Rouhi G. Sagittal plane body kinematics and kinetics during single-leg landing from increasing vertical heights and horizontal distances: Implications for risk of non-contact ACL injury. The Knee. 2014; 21(1):38-46. [DOI:10.1016/j.knee.2012.12.003] [PMID]
22. Hargrave MD, Carcia CR, Gansneder BM, Shultz SJ. Subtalar pronation does not influence impact forces or rate of loading during a single-leg landing. Journal of athletic training. 2003; 38(1):18. [PMID] [PMCID]
23. McNair PJ, Prapavessis H, Callender K. Decreasing landing forces: effect of instruction. British Journal of Sports Medicine. 2000; 34(4):293-6. [DOI:10.1136/bjsm.34.4.293] [PMID] [PMCID]
24. Chappell JD, Herman DC, Knight BS, Kirkendall DT, Garrett WE, Yu B. Effect of fatigue on knee kinetics and kinematics in stop-jump tasks. The American journal of sports medicine. 2005; 33(7):1022-9. 7 [DOI:10.1177/0363546504273047] [PMID]
25. Taunton JE, Ryan MB, Clement D, McKenzie DC, Lloyd-Smith D, Zumbo B. A retrospective case-control analysis of 2002 running injuries. British journal of sports medicine. 2002; 36(2):95-101 [DOI:10.1136/bjsm.36.2.95] [PMID] [PMCID]
26. Yeow C, Lee P, Goh J. Sagittal knee joint kinematics and energetics in response to different landing heights and techniques. The Knee. 2010; 17(2):127-31. [DOI:10.1016/j.knee.2009.07.015] [PMID]
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |