2019
DOI: 10.1080/00140139.2019.1690710
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effect of a load distribution system on mobility and performance during simulated and field hiking while under load

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

5
28
3

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(36 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
5
28
3
Order By: Relevance
“…A study investigating unloaded gait showed a nonuniform increase of dynamic stiffness among lower limb joints with increasing gait speed. 13 There are different forms to carry a load (eg, backpack, double packs, and trunk vest), 37 and since the load distribution affects biomechanics, 38,39 this can also impact dynamic joint stiffness. Future studies should investigate how dynamic joint stiffness changes across a continuum of loads and speeds, as well as load carriage distribution.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A study investigating unloaded gait showed a nonuniform increase of dynamic stiffness among lower limb joints with increasing gait speed. 13 There are different forms to carry a load (eg, backpack, double packs, and trunk vest), 37 and since the load distribution affects biomechanics, 38,39 this can also impact dynamic joint stiffness. Future studies should investigate how dynamic joint stiffness changes across a continuum of loads and speeds, as well as load carriage distribution.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Average and peak plantar pressure (Goffar et al, 2013;Park et al, 2013) and the plantar area (Park et al, 2013) increase in loaded conditions compared to unloaded, however, distribution of plantar pressure between plantar regions was unchanged (Goffar et al, 2013). Load carriage increased peak anterior-posterior breaking (Majumdar et al, 2013;Sessoms et al, 2020;Tilbury-Davis and Hooper, 1999) and propulsive (Majumdar et al, 2013) ground reaction forces and impulse (Majumdar et al, 2013;Tilbury-Davis and Hooper, 1999), and vertical impact (Goffar et al, 2013;Majumdar et al, 2013;Sessoms et al, 2020) and propulsive (Majumdar et al, 2013) forces and impulse (Goffar et al, 2013;Majumdar et al, 2013;Tilbury-Davis and Hooper, 1999). Medio-lateral ground reaction forces were lower in loaded conditions than unloaded but power and work were increased (Tilbury-Davis and Hooper, 1999), anterior-posterior and vertical power and work were also increased (Tilbury-Davis and Hooper, 1999).…”
Section: Load Carriage Effects On Ground Reaction Forces and Plantar ...mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Of the 8 studies reporting results for spatio-temporal variables 5 studies reported no effect. Specifically, walking speed (Majumdar et al, 2010;Park et al, 2013), step or stride length (Coombes and Kingswell, 2005;Majumdar et al, 2010;Park et al, 2013;Schulze et al, 2014;Sessoms et al, 2020), cadence (Coombes and Kingswell, 2005;Majumdar et al, 2010), step width (Park et al, 2013;Sessoms et al, 2020), and double and single support time (Majumdar et al, 2010). Studies reporting no effect employed backpack or combined backpack and armour loads of 10.7-34.7 kg (Majumdar et al, 2010;Schulze et al, 2014;Sessoms et al, 2020), 8 kg webbing (Coombes and Kingswell, 2005), vest or body armour loads of 8-27 kg (Coombes and Kingswell, 2005;Park et al, 2013) and when also carrying a rifle (Majumdar et al, 2010;Schulze et al, 2014;Sessoms et al, 2020).…”
Section: Risk Of Biasmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations