Using the variability of continuous relative phase as a measure to discriminate between healthy and injured runners

Does the amount of lower extremity movement variability differ between injured and uninjured populations? A systematic review

“…Discrepancies in scores were based on points attained under the “reporting” and “power” subscales. Eighteen studies scored a point for clearly describing included subjects (criterion 3). Four studies scored a point for reporting adverse outcomes resulting from performance of the task (criterion 8).…”

“…Overall findings revealed that 73% (n = 16/22) of studies reported a statistically significant difference in at least one dependent variable used to examine movement variability between injured subjects and uninjured controls. Injured subject groups demonstrated greater variability in 64% (n = 14/22) of the studies, reduced variability in 27% (n = 6/22), and no difference between groups was evident in 27% (n = 6/22) . Table presents the percentage of studies reporting greater, less, or no difference in variability when comparing injured subjects to uninjured controls.…”

“…In the studies investigating single specific injuries, 88% (n = 14/16) reported significant between‐group differences. Of these, greater variability was evident in 75% (n = 12/16), reduced variability in 31% (n = 5/16), while 13% (n = 2/16) reported no significant differences between injured and uninjured groups . Table presents the breakdown of findings when specific injury types were group together.…”

“…Pain was reported in 27% (n = 6/22) of the studies. Within these studies that reported pain, 83% (n = 5/6) found greater variability was evident in the injured group compared to the uninjured group, while one study reported no between‐group differences . Two of these studies assessed subjects’ pain levels using a visual analogue scale during the task performed .…”

Minimally Actuated Walking: Identifying Core Challenges to Economical Legged Locomotion Reveals Novel Solutions

“…In fact, this relationship is so standard that it is possible to determine the bounds of normal walking and use these to define abnormal locomotion (Schwartz et al, 2008;Lythgo et al, 2011;Dixon et al, 2014). A different, but equally consistent relationship exists for human running (Kurz et al, 2005;Perry and Burnfield, 2010;Hein et al, 2012;Floría et al, 2018). However, documenting the gait parameters used in a given circumstance does little to explain why these are the particular movement strategies (nearly) universally selected.…”