6533b860fe1ef96bd12c3249
RESEARCH PRODUCT
Effects of medially posted insoles on foot and lower limb mechanics across walking and running in overpronating men.
Juha-pekka KulmalaJukka KosonenErich MüllerJanne Avelasubject
MaleMOTIONKnee JointOrthoticsKinematicsWalkingORTHOTICSRunning0302 clinical medicineMOMENTSOrthopedics and Sports Medicineta315Rehabilitationmulti-segment foot kinematicsBiomechanicsta3141MechanicsBiomechanical Phenomenamedicine.anatomical_structureKNEEmedicine.medical_specialtyOrthotic DevicesMovementBiomedical EngineeringBiophysicspronationmedially posted insolesjuoksuwalking03 medical and health sciencesmedicinePressureHumansPronationTibiaKINEMATICSTibiabusiness.industryFootForefootANKLE030229 sport sciences217 Medical engineeringORTHOSESBIOMECHANICSbody regionsKineticskineticsREARFOOTCoronal planeAnklebusinesshuman activities030217 neurology & neurosurgeryAnkle JointCenter of pressure (fluid mechanics)description
Anti-pronation orthoses, like medially posted insoles (MPI), have traditionally been used to treat various of lower limb problems. Yet, we know surprisingly little about their effects on overall foot motion and lower limb mechanics across walking and running, which represent highly different loading conditions. To address this issue, multi-segment foot and lower limb mechanics was examined among 11 over-pronating men with normal (NORM) and MPI insoles during walking (self-selected speed 1.70 +/- 0.19 m/s vs 1.72 +/- 0.20 m/s, respectively) and running (4.04 +/- 0.17 m/s vs 4.10 +/- 0.13 m/s, respectively). The kinematic results showed that MPI reduced the peak forefoot eversion movement in respect to both hindfoot and tibia across walking and running when compared to NORM (p <0.05-0.01). No differences were found in hindfoot eversion between conditions. The kinetic results showed no insole effects in walking, but during running MPI shifted center of pressure medially under the foot (p <0.01) leading to an increase in frontal plane moments at the hip (p <0.05) and knee (p <0.05) joints and a reduction at the ankle joint (p <0.05). These findings indicate that MPI primarily controlled the forefoot motion across walking and running. While kinetic response to MPI was more pronounced in running than walking, kinematic effects were essentially similar across both modes. This suggests that despite higher loads placed upon lower limb during running, there is no need to have a stiffer insoles to achieve similar reduction in the forefoot motion than in walking. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Peer reviewed
year | journal | country | edition | language |
---|---|---|---|---|
2017-01-01 | Journal of biomechanics |