Hiking is a common recreational activity that provides numerous health benefits, such as reduced risk of heart disease, reduced blood pressure, and improved cardiorespiratory fitness. The use of specifically designed trekking poles has become popular among participants seeking to alleviate sore knees and increase balance and stability while walking. This review provides an overview of physiologic and biomechanical responses elicited when trekking poles are used during outdoor activities, such as hiking or Nordic walking, and discusses the clinical implications of the use of trekking poles. Google Scholar, PubMed, and Science-Direct databases, as well as university library catalogues, were searched for literature published between 1980 and 2019. The keywords used to search the literature were hiking poles, trekking poles, and Nordic walking and their combination with physiological responses, ground reaction forces, joint forces, spatiotemporal parameters, kinematics, electromyography, and/or balance. The related topics included the academic disciplines of biomechanics, sports science, and wilderness medicine. Reference lists of located studies were also reviewed for additional sources. During free, unloaded walking, users should compare the cost and benefit of using poles: Trekking poles decrease lower extremity loading and forces but increase cardiovascular demand. When carrying a large external load, trekking poles may offer benefit by decreasing lower extremity muscle activity and increasing balance and stability.

No abstract

No abstract

The anterior and posterior iliac spine markers frequently used to define the pelvis, are commonly occluded during three-dimensional (3D) motion capture. The occlusion of these markers leads to the use of various tracking marker configurations on the pelvis, which affect kinematic results. The purpose of this investigation was to examine the agreement of CODA pelvis kinematic results when two different tracking marker configurations were used during roofing tasks. 3D motion data were collected on seven male subjects while mimicking two roofing tasks. Hip joint angles (HJAs) were computed using the CODA pelvis with two different tracking marker configurations, the trochanter tracking method (TTM), and virtual pelvis tracking method (VPTM). Agreement between tracking marker configurations was assessed using cross-correlations, bivariate correlations, mean absolute differences (MADs), and Bland–Altman (BA) plots. The correlations displayed no time lag and strong agreement (all [Formula: see text]) between the HJA from the VPTM and TTM, suggesting the timing occurrence of variables are comparable between the two tracking marker configurations. The MAD between the VPTM and TTM displayed magnitude differences, but most of the differences were within a clinically acceptable range. Caution should still be used when comparing kinematic results between various tracking marker configurations, as differences exist.