Anthropometric characteristics and gait transition speed in human locomotion

Šentija, Davor; Rakovac, Marija; Babić, Vesna

doi:10.1016/j.humov.2011.06.006

Cited by 17 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Consistent with our first hypothesis, AMP subjects transition between gaits at a significantly slower absolute speed than CON subjects (1.73±0.13m/s and 2.09±0.05m/s respectively). The CON subjects’ gait transition speeds were consistent with previous work that has defined able-bodied gait transition speeds ranging from 1.89 and 2.16m/s (Diedrich and Warren, 1995, 1998; Hreljac, 1993a, 1995; Hreljac et al, 2001; Hreljac et al, 2008; Kram et al, 1997; Li and Ogden, 2012; Mercier et al, 1994; Prilutsky and Gregor, 2001; Raynor et al, 2002; Segers et al, 2006; Sentija et al, 2012; Thorstensson and Roberthson, 1987; Turvey et al, 1999; Van Caekenberghe et al, 2010). Although the gait transition speeds were determined using different ranges of speeds for CON and AMP subjects (CON: 1.3–2.6m/s; AMP: 1.0–2.3m/s), we believe this had no bearing on the difference found between the two groups.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Biomechanics of the human walk-to-run gait transition in persons with unilateral transtibial amputation

Giest

Chang

2016

Journal of Biomechanics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Propulsive force production (indicative of intrinsic force-length-velocity characteristics of the plantar flexor muscles) has been shown to be a major determinant of the human walk-to-run transition. The purpose of this work was to determine the gait transition speed of persons with unilateral, transtibial amputation donning a passive-elastic prosthesis and assess whether a mechanical limit of their intact side plantar flexor muscles is a major determinant of their walk-to-run transition. We determined each individual’s gait transition speed (GTS) via an incremental protocol and assessed kinetics and kinematics during walking at speeds 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 120, and 130% of that gait transition speed (100%:GTS). Unilateral, transtibial amputees transitioned between gaits at significantly slower absolute speeds than matched able-bodied controls (1.73±0.13 and 2.09±0.05m/s respectively, p<0.01). Peak anterior-posterior propulsive force increased with speed in controls until 100% of the preferred gait transition speed and decreased at greater speeds. A significant decrease in anterior-posterior propulsive force production was found at 120%GTS (110%: 0.27±0.04 > 120%: 0.23±0.05BW, p<0.05). In contrast, amputee subjects’ intact side generated significantly higher peak anterior-posterior propulsive forces while walking at speeds above their preferred gait transition speed (100%: 0.28±0.04 < 110%: 0.30±0.04BW, p<0.05). Changes in propulsive force production were found to be a function of changes in absolute speed, rather than relative to the walk-to-run transition speed. Therefore, the walk-to-run transition in unilateral, transtibial amputees is not likely dictated by propulsive force production or the force-length-velocity characteristics of the intact side plantar flexor muscles.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Biomechanics of the human walk-to-run gait transition in persons with unilateral transtibial amputation

Giest

Chang

2016

Journal of Biomechanics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A gait transition necessarily occurs in the bipedal locomotion when the gait speed is increased [ 31 – 42 , 48 , 49 , 57 ]. It is important to note that a smaller percent difference was observed between gross and net EOTS at each of the three gradients tested (< 2.9%, Fig 1 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many previous studies used PTS, instead of EOTS, with their own protocol for its determination [ 31 – 42 ]. Four objective criteria for determining the PTS were recently proposed [ 36 ], and it is impractical to satisfy all criteria for determinations of the individual PTS.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An individual gait transition from walking to running is not necessarily determined by the metabolic demands [ 32 – 35 ]. Biomechanical and/or anthropometric mechanisms explaining the gait transition have been argued [ 36 – 42 ], but this matter is still controversial. The standing V O 2 in non-obese young male adults has been reported to be approximately 4–5 mL·kg -1 ·min -1 [ 21 , 26 , 27 ], meaning that the effect of subtracting the standing V O 2 on the CoT- v relationship must be relatively greater at slower gait speeds.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Economical Speed and Energetically Optimal Transition Speed Evaluated by Gross and Net Oxygen Cost of Transport at Different Gradients

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The oxygen cost of transport per unit distance (CoT; mL·kg-1·km-1) shows a U-shaped curve as a function of walking speed (v), which includes a particular walking speed minimizing the CoT, so called economical speed (ES). The CoT-v relationship in running is approximately linear. These distinctive walking and running CoT-v relationships give an intersection between U-shaped and linear CoT relationships, termed the energetically optimal transition speed (EOTS). This study investigated the effects of subtracting the standing oxygen cost for calculating the CoT and its relevant effects on the ES and EOTS at the level and gradient slopes (±5%) in eleven male trained athletes. The percent effects of subtracting the standing oxygen cost (4.8 ± 0.4 mL·kg-1·min-1) on the CoT were significantly greater as the walking speed was slower, but it was not significant at faster running speeds over 9.4 km·h-1. The percent effect was significantly dependent on the gradient (downhill > level > uphill, P < 0.001). The net ES (level 4.09 ± 0.31, uphill 4.22 ± 0.37, and downhill 4.16 ± 0.44 km·h-1) was approximately 20% slower than the gross ES (level 5.15 ± 0.18, uphill 5.27 ± 0.20, and downhill 5.37 ± 0.22 km·h-1, P < 0.001). Both net and gross ES were not significantly dependent on the gradient. In contrast, the gross EOTS was slower than the net EOTS at the level (7.49 ± 0.32 vs. 7.63 ± 0.36 km·h-1, P = 0.003) and downhill gradients (7.78 ± 0.33 vs. 8.01 ± 0.41 km·h-1, P < 0.001), but not at the uphill gradient (7.55 ± 0.37 vs. 7.63 ± 0.51 km·h-1, P = 0.080). Note that those percent differences were less than 2.9%. Given these results, a subtraction of the standing oxygen cost should be carefully considered depending on the purpose of each study.

show abstract

“…This last formula was derived using data from Turner and Kimball (), Behnke (), Hechter (), Young et al (), WIlmore and Behnke (), Lewin and Skrobak‐Kaczynski (), Forsyth and Sinning (), Katch and McArdle (), Sinning (), Wilmore (), Pollock et al (), Jackson and Pollock (), NASA (), Dolgener et al (), Lin (), Devor et al (), Williams et al (), Knussmann and Sperwien (), Sharma et al (), Foley et al (), Housh et al (), Heller et al (), Chumanov et al (), Sentija et al (), and Wall‐Scheffler (). These data are, primarily, but not exclusively, derived from sport and/or body composition‐related publications and therefore the groups used in these studies have a limited geographic distribution (see discussion).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

New model for estimating the relationship between surface area and volume in the human body using skeletal remains

Kasabova

Holliday

2014

American J Phys Anthropol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A new model for estimating human body surface area and body volume/mass from standard skeletal metrics is presented. This model is then tested against both 1) "independently estimated" body surface areas and "independently estimated" body volume/mass (both derived from anthropometric data) and 2) the cylindrical model of Ruff. The model is found to be more accurate in estimating both body surface area and body volume/mass than the cylindrical model, but it is more accurate in estimating body surface area than it is for estimating body volume/mass (as reflected by the standard error of the estimate when "independently estimated" surface area or volume/mass is regressed on estimates derived from the present model). Two practical applications of the model are tested. In the first test, the relative contribution of the limbs versus the trunk to the body's volume and surface area is compared between "heat-adapted" and "cold-adapted" populations. As expected, the "cold-adapted" group has significantly more of its body surface area and volume in its trunk than does the "heat-adapted" group. In the second test, we evaluate the effect of variation in bi-iliac breadth, elongated or foreshortened limbs, and differences in crural index on the body's surface area to volume ratio (SA:V). Results indicate that the effects of bi-iliac breadth on SA:V are substantial, while those of limb lengths and (especially) the crural index are minor, which suggests that factors other than surface area relative to volume are driving morphological variation and ecogeographical patterning in limb prorportions.

show abstract

Anthropometric characteristics and gait transition speed in human locomotion

Cited by 17 publications

References 35 publications

Biomechanics of the human walk-to-run gait transition in persons with unilateral transtibial amputation

Biomechanics of the human walk-to-run gait transition in persons with unilateral transtibial amputation

Economical Speed and Energetically Optimal Transition Speed Evaluated by Gross and Net Oxygen Cost of Transport at Different Gradients

New model for estimating the relationship between surface area and volume in the human body using skeletal remains

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About