The effects of Achilles tendon compliance on triceps surae mechanics and energetics in walking.

Achilles tendon (AT) compliance can affect the generation and transmission of triceps surae muscle forces, and thus has important biomechanical consequences for walking performance. However, the uniarticular soleus (SOL) and the biarticular (GAS) function differently during walking, with in vivo evidence suggesting that their associated fascicles and tendinous structures exhibit unique kinematics during walking. Given the strong association between muscle fiber length, velocity and force production, we conjectured that SOL and GAS mechanics and energetic behavior would respond differently to altered AT compliance. To test this, we characterized GAS and SOL muscle and tendon mechanics and energetics due to systematic changes in tendon compliance using musculoskeletal simulations of walking. Increased tendon compliance enlarged GAS and SOL tendon excursions, shortened fiber operation lengths and affected muscle excitation patterns. For both muscles, an optimal tendon compliance (tendon strains of approximately 5% with maximum isometric force) existed that minimized metabolic energy consumption. However, GAS muscle-tendon mechanics and energetics were significantly more sensitive to changes in tendon compliance than were those for SOL. In addition, GAS was not able to return stored tendon energy during push-off as effectively as SOL, particularly for larger values of tendon compliance. These fundamental differences between GAS and SOL sensitivity to altered tendon compliance seem to arise from the biarticular nature of GAS. These insights are potentially important for understanding the functional consequences of altered Achilles tendon compliance due to aging, injury, or disease.

A test of the metabolic cost of cushioning hypothesis during unshod and shod running.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to investigate the effects of surface and shoe cushioning on the metabolic cost of running. In running, the leg muscles generate force to cushion the impact with the ground. External cushioning (surfaces or shoes) may reduce the muscular effort needed for cushioning and thus reduce metabolic cost. Our primary hypothesis was that the metabolic cost of unshod running would decrease with a more cushioned running surface. We also hypothesized that because of the counteracting effects of shoe cushioning and mass, unshod running on a hard surface would have approximately the same metabolic cost as running in lightweight, cushioned shoes. METHODS: To test these hypotheses, we attached 10- and 20-mm-thick slats of the same foam cushioning used in running shoe midsoles to the belt of a treadmill that had a rigid deck. Twelve subjects who preferred a midfoot strike pattern and had substantial barefoot/minimalist running experience ran without shoes on the normal treadmill belt and on each thickness of foam. They also ran with lightweight, cushioned shoes on the normal belt. We collected V˙O2 and V˙CO2 to calculate the metabolic power demand and used a repeated-measures ANOVA to compare between conditions. RESULTS: Compared to running unshod on the normal belt, running unshod on the 10-mm-thick foam required 1.63% ± 0.67% (mean ± SD) less metabolic power (P = 0.034) but running on the 20-mm-thick foam had no significant metabolic effect. Running with and without shoes on the normal belt had similar metabolic power demands, likely because the beneficial energetic effects of cushioning counterbalanced the detrimental effects of shoe mass. CONCLUSIONS: On average, surface and shoe cushioning reduce the metabolic power required for submaximal running.