Posture-induced modulation of lower-limb joint powers in perturbed running.

Despite evidence on trunk flexion's impact on locomotion mechanics, its role in modulating lower-limb energetics during perturbed running remains underexplored. Therefore, we investigated posture-induced power redistribution in the lower-limb joints (hip, knee, and ankle), along with the relative contribution from each joint to total lower-limb average positive and negative mechanical powers (i.e., over time) during perturbed running. Twelve runners (50% female) ran at self-selected (~15°) and three more sagittal trunk inclinations (backward, ~0°; low forward, ~20°; high forward, ~25°) on a custom-built runway, incorporating both a level surface and a 10 cm visible drop-step positioned midway, while simultaneously recording three-dimensional kinematics and kinetics. We used inverse dynamics analysis to determine moments and powers in lower-limb joints. Increasing the trunk forward inclination yielded the following changes in lower-limb mechanics: a) an elevation in total positive power with a distoproximal shift and a reduction in total negative power; b) systematic increases in hip positive power, coupled with decreased and increased contribution to total negative (during level-step) and positive (during drop-step) powers, respectively; c) reductions in both negative and positive knee powers, along with a decrease in its contribution to total positive power. Regardless of the trunk posture, accommodating drop-steps while running demands elevated total limb negative and positive powers with the ankle as a primary source of energy absorption and generation. Leaning the trunk more forward induces a distoproximal shift in positive power, whereas leaning backward exerts an opposing influence on negative power within the lower-limb joints.

Leaning the Trunk Forward Decreases Patellofemoral Joint Loading During Uneven Running.

ABSTRACT: AminiAghdam, S, Epro, G, James, D, and Karamanidis, K. Leaning the trunk forward decreases patellofemoral joint loading during uneven running. J Strength Cond Res 36(12): 3345-3351, 2022-Although decline surfaces or a more upright trunk posture during running increase the patellofemoral joint (PFJ) contact force and stress, less is known about these kinetic parameters under simultaneous changes to the running posture and surface height. This study aimed to investigate the interaction between Step (10-cm drop-step and level step) and Posture (trunk angle from the vertical: self-selected, ∼15°; backward, ∼0°; forward, ∼25°) on PFJ kinetics (primary outcomes) and knee kinematics and kinetics as well as hip and ankle kinetics (secondary outcomes) in 12 runners at 3.5 ms -1 . Two-way repeated measures analyses of variance ( α = 0.05) revealed no step-related changes in peak PFJ kinetics across running postures; however, a decreased peak knee flexion angle and increased joint stiffness in the drop-step only during backward trunk-leaning. The Step main effect revealed significantly increased peak hip and ankle extension moments in the drop-step, signifying pronounced mechanical demands on these joints. The Posture main effect revealed significantly higher and lower PFJ kinetics during backward and forward trunk-leaning, respectively, when compared with the self-selected condition. Forward trunk-leaning yielded significantly lower peak knee extension moments and higher hip extension moments, whereas the opposite effects occurred with backward trunk-leaning. Overall, changes to the running posture, but not to the running surface height, influenced the PFJ kinetics. In line with the previously reported efficacy of forward trunk-leaning in mitigating PFJ stress while even or decline running, this technique, through a distal-to-proximal joint load redistribution, also seems effective during running on surfaces with height perturbations.

Uneven running: How does trunk-leaning affect the lower-limb joint mechanics and energetics?

This study aimed to investigate the role of trunk posture in running locomotion. Twelve recreational runners ran in the laboratory across even and uneven ground surface (expected 10 cm drop-step) with three trunk-lean angles from the vertical (self-selected, ∼15°; anterior, ∼25°; posterior, ∼0°) while 3D kinematic and kinetic data were collected using a 3D motion-capture-system and two embedded force-plates. Two-way repeated measures ANOVAs (α = 0.05) compared lower-limb joint mechanics (angles, moments, energy absorption and generation) and ground-reaction-force parameters (braking and propulsive impulse) between Step (level and drop) and Posture conditions. The Step-by-Posture interaction revealed decreased hip energy generation, and greater peak knee extension moment in the drop-step during running with posterior versus anterior trunk-lean. Furthermore, energy absorption across hip and ankle nearly doubled in the drop-step across all running conditions. The Step main effect revealed that the knee and ankle energy absorption, ankle energy generation, ground-reaction-force, and braking impulse significantly increased in the drop-step. The Posture main effect revealed that, compared with a self-selected trunk-lean, the knee's energy absorption/generation, ankle's energy generation and the braking impulse were either retained or attenuated when leaning the trunk anteriorly. The opposite effects occurred with a posterior trunk-lean. In conclusion, while the pronounced mechanical ankle stress in drop-steps is marginally affected by posture, changing the trunk-lean reorganizes the load distribution across the knee and hip joints. Leaning the trunk anteriorly in running shifts loading from the knee to the hip not only in level running but also when coping with ground-level changes.HighlightsChanging the trunk-lean when running reorganizes the load distribution across the knee and hip joints.Leaning the trunk anteriorly from a habitual trunk posture during running attenuates the mechanical stress on the knee, while the opposite effect occurs with a posterior trunk-lean, irrespective to the ground surface uniformity.The effect of posture on pronounced mechanical ankle stress in small perturbation height during running is marginal.Leaning the trunk anteriorly shifts loading from the knee to the hip not only in level running but also when coping with small perturbation height.

The influence of sagittal trunk lean on uneven running mechanics.

The role of trunk orientation during uneven running is not well understood. This study compared the running mechanics during the approach step to and the step down for a 10 cm expected drop, positioned halfway through a 15 m runway, with that of the level step in 12 participants at a speed of 3.5 m s-1 while maintaining self-selected (17.7±4.2 deg; mean±s.d.), posterior (1.8±7.4 deg) and anterior (26.6±5.6 deg) trunk leans from the vertical. Our findings reveal that the global (i.e. the spring-mass model dynamics and centre-of-mass height) and local (i.e. knee and ankle kinematics and kinetics) biomechanical adjustments during uneven running are specific to the step nature and trunk posture. Unlike the anterior-leaning posture, running with a posterior trunk lean is characterized by increases in leg angle, leg compression, knee flexion angle and moment, resulting in a stiffer knee and a more compliant spring-leg compared with the self-selected condition. In the approach step versus the level step, reductions in leg length and stiffness through the ankle stiffness yield lower leg force and centre-of-mass position. Contrariwise, significant increases in leg length, angle and force, and ankle moment, reflect in a higher centre-of-mass position during the step down. Plus, ankle stiffness significantly decreases, owing to a substantially increased leg compression. Overall, the step down appears to be dominated by centre-of-mass height changes, regardless of having a trunk lean. Observed adjustments during uneven running can be attributed to anticipation of changes to running posture and height. These findings highlight the role of trunk posture in human perturbed locomotion relevant for the design and development of exoskeleton or humanoid bipedal robots.

Reactive gait and postural adjustments following the first exposures to (un)expected stepdown.

This study evaluated the reactive biomechanical strategies associated with both upper- and lower-body (lead and trail limbs) following the first exposures to (un)expected stepdown at comfortable (1.22 ±â€¯0.08 m/s) and fast (1.71 ±â€¯0.11 m/s) walking velocities. Eleven healthy adults completed 34 trails per walking velocity over an 8-m, custom-built track with two forceplates embedded in its center. For the expected stepdown, the track was lowered by 0-, -10- and -20-cm from the site of the second forceplate, whereas the unexpected stepdown was created by camouflaging the second forceplate (-10-cm). Two-way repeated-measurement ANOVAs detected no velocity-related effects of stepdown on kinematic and kinetic parameters during lead limb stance-phase, and on the trail limb stepping kinematics. However, analyses of significant interactions revealed greater peak flexion angles across the trunk and the trail limb joints (hip, knee and ankle) in unexpected versus expected stepdown conditions at a faster walking velocity. The -10-cm unexpected stepdown (main effect) had a greater influence on locomotor behavior compared to expected conditions due mainly to the absence of predictive adjustments, reflected by a significant decrease in peak knee flexion, contact time and vertical impulse during stance-phase. Walking faster (main effect) was associated with an increase in hip peak flexion and net anteroposterior impulse, and a decrease in contact time and vertical impulse during stepdown. The trail limb, in response, swung forward faster, generating a larger and faster recovery step. However, such reactive stepping following unexpected stepdown was yet a sparse compensation for an unstable body configuration, assessed by significantly smaller step width and anteroposterior margin-of-stability at foot-contact in the first-recovery-step compared with expected conditions. These findings depict the impact of the expectedness of stepdown onset on modulation of global dynamic postural control for a successful accommodation of (un)expected surface elevation changes in young, healthy adults.

Dynamic postural control during (in)visible curb descent at fast versus comfortable walking velocity.

BACKGROUND: The unexpectedness of ground-contact onset in stepping down due, e.g., to a camouflaged curb during ongoing gait may impose potential postural control challenges, which might be deteriorated when walking faster. RESEARCH QUESTION: Does traversing camouflaged versus visible curbs, at a fast walking velocity, induce more unstable body configurations, assessed by a smaller anteroposterior "margin of stability" (MoS)? METHODS: For twelve healthy participants, we investigated MoS at foot touchdown in descent and in the first recovery step from 0- and 10-cm visible and camouflaged curbs at comfortable (1.22 ± 0.08 m/s) and fast (1.71 ± 0.11 m/s) walking velocities. Three-way (velocity, elevation, visibility) and two-way (velocity, visibility) repeated-measurement ANOVAs were performed to determine their interactions on MoS, and its determining parameters, during curb negotiation and recovery step, respectively. RESULTS: No greater postural instability when traversing a camouflaged versus visible curb at a faster walking velocity during curb descent, indicated by no three-way interaction effects on MoS. However, an elevation-by-visibility interaction showed a dramatic decrease of MoS when descending a 10-cm camouflaged versus visible curb. This was because of a farther anterior displacement of center-of-mass with a larger velocity. Furthermore, the walking velocity was independently associated with a smaller MoS and a more anteriorly-shifted center-of-mass with a higher velocity. In the recovery step, participants demonstrated a reduced stability of the body configuration when walking faster or recovering from a camouflaged than from a visible curb. The mentioned result implies that the potential to increase the base-of-support to compensate for an increased center-of-mass velocity, induced by an increased walking velocity, is limited. SIGNIFICANCE: Despite a significant independent main effect of walking velocity, a more unstable postural control observed during traversing of camouflaged versus visible curbs was found not to be walking velocity-related in young individuals. Further research, including elderly may shed more light on these results.

Locomotor stability in able-bodied trunk-flexed gait across uneven ground.

This study aimed to explore the control of dynamic stability of the imposed trunk-flexed gaits across uneven ground. For ten young healthy participants, we compared the anteroposterior margin of stability (MoS) and lower limb joint kinematics at foot-contact during accommodating a consecutive stepdown and step-up (10-cm visible drop) to that of level steps while maintaining four postures: regular erect, ∼30°, ∼50° and maximal trunk flexion from the vertical. Two-way repeated measures ANOVAs revealed no significant step × posture interactions for the MoS (p = .187) and for the parameters that contributed to the MoS calculation (p > .05), whereas significant interactions were found for the hip flexion, hip position (relative to the posterior boundary of the base of support) and the knee flexion. The main effect of step (p = .0001), but not posture (p = .061), on the MoS was significant. Post hoc tests, compared with the level step, showed that the decreased magnitude of the MoS during stepping down (p = .011)-mainly due to a further forward displacement of the center of mass position (p = .006)-significantly increased in the immediate following step-up (p = .002) as a consequence of a substantial increase in the base of support (p = .003). In the stepdown versus level step, the hip and knee flexions as well as the hip position did not significantly change in the trunk-flexed gaits (p > .05). In the step-up, the knee flexion increased (except for the gaits with the maximum trunk flexion), whereas other kinematic variables remained unchanged. Quantifying the step-to-step control of dynamic stability in a perturbed walking reflected continuous control adaptations through the interaction between gait and posture. In fact, the able-bodied participants were able to safely control the motion of the body's CoM with the combination of compensatory kinematic adjustments in lower-limb and adaptations in stepping pattern.

The effects of an expected twofold perturbation on able-bodied gait: Trunk flexion and uneven ground surface.

BACKGROUND: Although alteration in trunk orientation and ground level potentially affects gait pattern individually, it is plausible to examine the interaction effects of such factors. OBJECTIVE: The interaction effects between trunk-flexed gait and uneven ground on able-bodied gait pattern. METHODS: For twelve able-bodied participants, we compared the adaptive mechanisms in kinematics, kinetics and spatial-temporal parameters of gait (STPG) with bent postures (30° and 50° of sagittal trunk flexion) across uneven surface (10-cm visible drop at the sight of the second ground contact) with that of upright posture on even ground surface. RESULTS: Significant between-posture changes on the uneven surface included a decreased peak ankle dorsiflexion angle and vertical ground reaction force (GRF) 2nd peak as trunk flexion increased. Moreover, significant between-ground surface changes for each individual gait posture were a decreased peak ankle dorsiflexion angle and ankle range of motion irrespective of trunk posture and a reduced trailing step duration and vertical GRF 2nd peak in upright walking. The spatial parameters of gait remained unchanged across uneven surface, but at the expense of pronounced adjustments in temporal parameters, i.e., a more conservative gait strategy, indicating a distinct contribution from spatial and temporal strategies in trunk-flexed gaits. This was associated with greater peak flexion angles across lower limb joints regardless of trunk posture, alongside with an exertion of greater forces at faster rates earlier in stance and attenuated forces at lower rates at the end of the stance (i.e., early-skewed vertical GRF). When considering the main effect of posture, a more crouched gait was executed with reduced temporal parameters (except for cadence) and an early-skewed vertical GRF patterns with increasing trunk flexion. SIGNIFICANCE: These results may have implications for understanding the nature of compensatory mechanisms in gait pattern of older adults and/or patients with altered trunk orientations while accommodating uneven ground.

Posture alteration as a measure to accommodate uneven ground in able-bodied gait.

Though the effects of imposed trunk posture on human walking have been studied, less is known about such locomotion while accommodating changes in ground level. For twelve able participants, we analyzed kinematic parameters mainly at touchdown and toe-off in walking across a 10-cm visible drop in ground level (level step, pre-perturbation step, step-down, step-up) with three postures (regular erect, ~30° and ~50° of trunk flexion from the vertical). Two-way repeated measures ANOVAs revealed step-specific effects of posture on the kinematic behavior of gait mostly at toe-off of the pre-perturbation step and the step-down as well as at touchdown of the step-up. In preparation to step-down, with increasing trunk flexion the discrepancy in hip-center of pressure distance, i.e. effective leg length, (shorter at toe-off versus touchdown), compared with level steps increased largely due to a greater knee flexion at toe-off. Participants rotated their trunk backwards during step-down (2- to 3-fold backwards rotation compared with level steps regardless of trunk posture) likely to control the angular momentum of their whole body. The more pronounced trunk backwards rotation in trunk-flexed walking contributed to the observed elevated center of mass (CoM) trajectories during the step-down which may have facilitated drop negotiation. Able-bodied individuals were found to recover almost all assessed kinematic parameters comprising the vertical position of the CoM, effective leg length and angle as well as hip, knee and ankle joint angles at the end of the step-up, suggesting an adaptive capacity and hence a robustness of human walking with respect to imposed trunk orientations. Our findings may provide clinicians with insight into a kinematic interaction between posture and locomotion in uneven ground. Moreover, a backward rotation of the trunk for negotiating step-down may be incorporated into exercise-based interventions to enhance gait stability in individuals who exhibit trunk-flexed postures during walking.

Force direction patterns promote whole body stability even in hip-flexed walking, but not upper body stability in human upright walking.

Directing the ground reaction forces to a focal point above the centre of mass of the whole body promotes whole body stability in human and animal gaits similar to a physical pendulum. Here we show that this is the case in human hip-flexed walking as well. For all upper body orientations (upright, 25°, 50°, maximum), the focal point was well above the centre of mass of the whole body, suggesting its general relevance for walking. Deviations of the forces' lines of action from the focal point increased with upper body inclination from 25 to 43 mm root mean square deviation (RMSD). With respect to the upper body in upright gait, the resulting force also passed near a focal point (17 mm RMSD between the net forces' lines of action and focal point), but this point was 18 cm below its centre of mass. While this behaviour mimics an unstable inverted pendulum, it leads to resulting torques of alternating sign in accordance with periodic upper body motion and probably provides for low metabolic cost of upright gait by keeping hip torques small. Stabilization of the upper body is a consequence of other mechanisms, e.g. hip reflexes or muscle preflexes.

Effects of altered sagittal trunk orientation on kinetic pattern in able-bodied walking on uneven ground.

Studies of disturbed human locomotion often focus on the dynamics of the gait when either posture, movement or surface is perturbed. Yet, the interaction effects of variation of trunk posture and ground level on kinetic behaviour of able-bodied gait have not been explored. For 12 participants we investigated the kinetic behaviour, as well as velocity and contact time, across four steps including an unperturbed step on level ground, pre-perturbation, perturbation (10-cm drop) and post-perturbation steps while walking with normal speed with four postures: regular erect, with 30°, 50° and maximal sagittal trunk flexion (70°). Two-way repeated measures ANOVAs detected significant interactions of posture×step for the second peak of the vertical ground reaction force (GRF), propulsive impulse, contact time and velocity. An increased trunk flexion was associated with a systematic decrease of the second GRF peak during all steps and with a decreased contact time and an increased velocity across steps, except for the perturbation step. Pre-adaptations were more pronounced in the approach step to the drop in regular erect gait. With increased trunk flexion, walking on uneven ground exhibited reduced changes in GRF kinetic parameters relative to upright walking. It seems that in trunk-flexed gaits the trunk is used in a compensatory way during the step-down to accommodate changes in ground level by adjusting its angle leading to lower variations in centre of mass height. Exploitation of this mechanism resembles the ability of small birds in adjusting their zig-zag-like configured legs to cope with changes in ground level.

Increasing trunk flexion transforms human leg function into that of birds despite different leg morphology.

Pronograde trunk orientation in small birds causes prominent intra-limb asymmetries in the leg function. As yet, it is not clear whether these asymmetries induced by the trunk reflect general constraints on the leg function regardless of the specific leg architecture or size of the species. To address this, we instructed 12 human volunteers to walk at a self-selected velocity with four postures: regular erect, or with 30 deg, 50 deg and maximal trunk flexion. In addition, we simulated the axial leg force (along the line connecting hip and centre of pressure) using two simple models: spring and damper in series, and parallel spring and damper. As trunk flexion increases, lower limb joints become more flexed during stance. Similar to birds, the associated posterior shift of the hip relative to the centre of mass leads to a shorter leg at toe-off than at touchdown, and to a flatter angle of attack and a steeper leg angle at toe-off. Furthermore, walking with maximal trunk flexion induces right-skewed vertical and horizontal ground reaction force profiles comparable to those in birds. Interestingly, the spring and damper in series model provides a superior prediction of the axial leg force across trunk-flexed gaits compared with the parallel spring and damper model; in regular erect gait, the damper does not substantially improve the reproduction of the human axial leg force. In conclusion, mimicking the pronograde locomotion of birds by bending the trunk forward in humans causes a leg function similar to that of birds despite the different morphology of the segmented legs.