Article

Effects of added trunk load and corresponding trunk position adaptations on lower extremity biomechanics during drop-landings

Department of Health Education and Promotion, East Carolina University, 249 Ward Sports Medicine Building, Greenville, NC 27858, USA.
Journal of Biomechanics (Impact Factor: 2.66). 02/2008; 41(1):180-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2007.06.027
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Although both trunk mass and trunk position have the potential to affect lower extremity biomechanics during landing, these effects are not well understood. Our overall hypothesis stated that both trunk mass and trunk position affect lower extremity biomechanics in landing. Thus, our purpose was to determine the effects of an added trunk load and kinematic trunk adaptation groups on lower extremity joint kinematics, kinetics, and energetics during drop-landings. Twenty-one recreationally active subjects were instrumented for biomechanical analysis. Subjects performed two sets of eight double-limb landings with and without 10% body weight added to the trunk. On lower extremity dependent variables, 2(condition: no load, trunk load)x2(group: trunk extensors vs. trunk flexors) ANOVAs were performed. Condition by group interactions at the hip showed differing responses to the added trunk load between groups where the trunk extensor group decreased hip extensor efforts ( downward decrease 11-18%) while the trunk flexor group increased hip extensor efforts ( upward increase 14-19%). The trunk load increased biomechanical demands at the knee and ankle regardless of trunk adaptation group. However, the percent increases in angular impulses and energy absorption in the trunk extensor group were 14-28% while increases in the trunk flexor group were 4-9%. Given the 10% body weight added to the trunk, the 14-28% increases at the knee and ankle in the trunk extensor group were likely due to the reduced hip extensor efforts during landing. Overall these findings support our overall hypothesis that both trunk mass and trunk position affect lower extremity biomechanics during vertically oriented landing tasks.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
92 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In this study, the lower limbs joints were analyzed for features based on the biomechanical characteristics of landing techniques according to height and landing on the ground type (flats and downhill). In order to achieve the objectives of the study, changes were analyzed in detail contents such as the height and form of the first landing on the ground at different angles of joints, torso and legs, torso and legs of the difference in the range of angular motion of the joint, the maximum angular difference between joints, the lower limbs joints difference between the maximum moment and the difference between COM changes. The subjects in this study do not last six months did not experience joint injuries 10 males in 20 aged were tested. Experimental tools to analyze were the recording and video equipment. Samsung's SCH-650A model camera was used six units, and the 2 GRF-based AMTI were used BP400800 model. 6-unit-camera synchronized with LED (photo cell) and Line Lock system were used. the output from the camera and the ground reaction force based on the data to synchronize A/D Syc. box was used. To calculate the coordinates of three-dimensional space, (X, Y, Z axis) to the size of the control points attached to the framework of 36 markers were used, and 29 where the body was taken by attaching a marker to the surface. Two kinds of land condition, 40cm and 60cm in height, and ground conditions in the form of two kinds of flat and downhill slopes () of the landing operation was performed and each subject's 3 mean two-way RM ANOVA in SPSS 18.0 was used and this time, all the significant level was set at a=.05. Consequently, analyzing the landing technique as land form and land on the ground, the changes of external environmental factors, and the lower limbs joints' function in the evaluation were significantly different from the slopes. Landing of the slop plane were more load on the joints than landing of plane. Especially, knee extensor moment compared to the two kinds of landing, slopes plane were approximately two times higher than flat plane, and it was statistical significance. Most of all not so much range of motion and angular velocity of the shock to reduce stress was important. In the further research, front landing as well as various direction of motion of kinetic, kinetic factors and EMG variables on lower limbs joints of the study in terms of injury-prevention-approach is going to be needed.
    12/2011; 21(4). DOI:10.5103/KJSB.2011.21.4.437
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study quantified how body borne load impacts hip and knee biomechanics during anticipated and unanticipated single-leg cutting maneuvers. Fifteen male military personnel performed a series of single-leg cutting maneuvers with three different load configurations (light, ~6kg, medium, ~20kg, and heavy, ~40kg). Subject-based means of the specific lower limb biomechanical variables were submitted to repeated measures ANOVA to test the main and interaction effects of body borne load and movement type. With body borne load, stance time (P<0.001) increased, while larger hip (P=0.027) and knee flexion (P=0.004), and hip adduction (P<0.001) moments, and decreased hip (P=0.002) and knee flexion (P<0.001), and hip adduction (P=0.003) postures were evident. Further, the hip (P<0.001) and ankle (P=0.024) increased energy absorption, while the knee (P=0.020) increased energy generation with body borne load. During the unanticipated maneuvers, the hip (P=0.009) and knee (P=0.032) increased energy generation, and peak hip flexion moment (P=0.002) increased relative to the anticipated movements. With the body borne load, participants adopted biomechanical patterns that decreased their locomotive ability including larger moments and reduced flexion postures of the lower limb. During the single-leg cut, participants used greater energy absorption from the large, proximal muscles of the hip and greater energy generation from the knee with the addition of load. Participant׳s performance when carrying a range of loads was not compromised by anticipation, as they did not exhibit the hip and knee kinetic and kinematic adaptations previously demonstrated when reacting to an unplanned stimulus.
    Journal of Biomechanics 09/2014; DOI:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2014.09.002 · 2.66 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose: The study was designed to investigate the effects of landing heights on muscle activities and ground reaction force during drop landing. Methods: Sixteen healthy adults were recruited along with their written informed consent. They performed a drop-landing task at the height of 20, 40, and 60cm. They completed three trials in each condition and biomechanical changes were measured. The data collected by each way of landing task and analyzed by One-way ANOVA. Ground reaction forces were measured by force flate, muscle activities measured by MP150 system. Results: There were significant differences in ground reaction forces, and significant increases in muscle activities of tibialis anterior, medial gastrocnemius and biceps femoris with landing heights. Conclusion: These findings revealed that heights of landing increases risk factors of body damage because of biomechanical mechanism and future studies should focus on prevention from damage of external conditions.
    01/2011; 6(2).