|
COMPARATIVE KINEMATIC MEASURES OF TREADMILL RUNNING WITH OR WITHOUT
BODY WEIGHT SUPPORT IN RUNNERS
|
Department of Health, Physical Education and Recreation, University of Minnesota
Duluth, MN, USA
| Received |
|
29 June 2005 |
| Accepted |
|
19
November 2005 |
| Published |
|
01
December 2005 |
©
Journal of Sports Science and Medicine (2005) 4, 583
- 589
Search
Google Scholar for Citing Articles
| ABSTRACT |
| Treadmill
walking and running using a supportive harness has been used as a
training method to rehabilitate injured patients' walking or running
gait. Comparison of full weight support (FWS) and body weight support
(BWS) kinematic measures in competitive runners has received little
attention. The purpose of this study was to compare selected FWS to
BWS kinematic measures in healthy competitive runners. Ten male runners
(age = 21.4 ± 1.5 years) with a training regimen averaging 64 km per
week at 3.8 m·s-1 participated. All participants ran three
3-minute trials. The randomized trial conditions were: FWS, 20% BWS,
and 40% BWS. All conditions were videotaped with 2 cameras and a 21-point,
3-D model was generated for analysis. From the position-time data,
cycle length (CL), cycle frequency (CF), time of contact (TC), hip-,
knee-, ankle- range of motion in degrees (H-ROM, K-ROM, and A-ROM,
respectively), and vertical displacement of the center of mass (COM)
were derived and compared. With increasing support conditions, cycle
length increased. Cycle frequency, hip and ankle angle ranges, and
COM vertical displacement decreased (p < 0.05). However, the ankle
angle range of motion varied little between 20% and 40 % BWS (p >
0.05). BWS running produced significant changes in selected kinematic
measures. These changes may provide insight into runners' behavior
when using BWS in training or recovery from competition. Additional
investigation of BWS training affect with competitive runners would
be recommended.
KEY
WORDS: Partial weight support, locomotion, gait characteristics,
running.
|
| INTRODUCTION |
|
Treadmill
walking and running when combined with a supportive harness to provide
body weight support (BWS) is being used in the retraining of the
patient's walk and run gait. As walking and running gait improves,
BWS is decreased and the patient is required to control greater
percentages of body weight. The effectiveness of BWS in physical
therapy research with disabled patients indicated significant improvement
in their ability to walk independently, improve their balance, and
increased their gait velocity, step frequency, and stride length
from the beginning of retraining to the end of training (Crompton
et al., 2001;
Field-Fote and Tepavac, 2002;
Finch and Barbeau, 1985;
Finch et al., 1991;
Hesse et al., 1994;
1999;
Lee and Farley, 1998;
and Waagfjord et al., 1990).
Finch et al. (1991)
studied normal male subject's walking gait under the influence of
various BWS levels as compared to full weight support (FWS) gait
using a treadmill. As the body weight was systematically removed
and walking speed adjusted for BWS levels, the following changes
in muscle activity, and mechanical changes in the walk were observed:
1) the amplitude in muscle activity decreased during the weight
bearing phase and increased during the swing phase of the walk;
2) the center of gravity was progressively raised, which resulted
in decreased hip and knee angular displacement with a decrease in
single-limb support. According to Finch et al. (1991),
all these observed changes were not significantly different and
indicated that BWS could be advantageous in walking gait retraining
in normal subjects. Most angular differences of the hip and knee
were attributed to harness support and the inability of the subjects
to fully plant their foot on the treadmill.
McKay-Lyons et al. (2001)
investigated BWS walking on cardio-respiratory changes in adults
without impairment. Peak-expiratory gas exchange values changed
little from a FWS to the BWS condition where 15% of the subject's
mass was supported by a harness during treadmill exercise testing.
The researchers contended that cardio-respiratory exercise testing
protocols used in association with BWS could safely be used in testing
patients with neurological injuries.
Body weight support systems have also been used in the study of
locomotion in a microgravity environment. Reduced gravity research
(Chang and Kram, 1999;
Chang et al., 2000;
2001;
Donelan and Kram, 2000;
Farley and McMahon, 1992;
He et al., 1991)
have investigated the biomechanics, kinetic energy, and metabolic
energy cost in walking or running on a reduced-gravity simulator
and force treadmill by simply adding or reducing subject's body
weight using a harness apparatus. This area of research required
the use of some gravity- reducing apparatus such as the reduced-gravity
simulator and force-measuring treadmill. In particular, force-measuring
treadmills were specifically designed to measure vertical and horizontal
ground reaction forces across different walking speeds and BWS conditions.
Such studies have indicated the following changes in the walk and
run gait from FWS to BWS condition: 1) the horizontal forces change
more than vertical forces (Chang and Kram, 1999;
Chang et al., 2001),
2) the exchange of kinetic energy as it related to the center of
mass was effected by different walking and running velocity and
with proportional, systematically reduced BWS conditions (Chang
and Kram, 1999;
Chang et al., 2001),
3) the vertical and horizontal ground reaction forces decrease (Chang
and Kram, 1999;
Chang et al., 2000;
2001; Kram et al., 1997),
4) the stride length and frequency increased (Farley and McMahon,
1992;
Kram et al., 1997),
5) energy consumption as measured by the rate of oxygen consumption
decreases (Farley and McMahon, 1992),
and 6) the foot contact time during the supportive phase of the
walk or run decreases (Chang et al. , 2000).
There have been few reports describing the kinematic measures of
BWS with experienced healthy runners. Our rationale was to examine
FWS and BWS using a kinematics perspective with healthy athletes
running on a treadmill at a high constant speed. We adopted a similar
BWS strategy used in physical therapy and in the study of microgravity
environment where the runner's mass was systematically reduced.
We believed that the findings would provide meaningful interpretations
about the similarities and differences between FWS and BWS treadmill
running with experienced runners.
Several difficulties were discovered in reviewing the literature
about BWS effects on running. There was a lack of consistency in
the protocol used to reduce the subject's mass using a harness system.
In addition, only He et al. (1991)
examined BWS treadmill running using a speed greater than 2.5 m·s-1.
Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare FWS to BWS on
kinematics characteristics of running throughout one running cycle
at a high constant speed of 3. 8 m·s-1 or 7 mph. The
kinematic changes from FWS to BWS in running on a treadmill that
were of interest in this study are the angles of hip, knee, and
ankle, foot contact time, vertical displacement of the center of
mass, stride length and stride frequency. These kinematic measures
are common in the analysis of the running gait and are related to
research of basic running mechanics.
We used the FWS condition to determine if the kinematic measures
in BWS running would change when their body mass was reduced 20%
and 40%. It was hypothesized that BWS treadmill running produced
significant changes in the kinematic measures compared to FWS treadmill
running. Physical therapy and simulated microgravity research suggest
that BWS running will cause a smaller vertical displacement of the
center of mass, as compared to FWS running, associated with decreased
contact time, decreased stride frequency, decreased hip, knee, and
ankle angle ranges.
|
| METHODS |
|
Subjects
Ten male runners (age = 21.4 ± 1.5 years, mass = 68.4 ± 3.3 kg;
means ± S.D.) were recruited from the University of Minnesota Duluth
cross-country team. The participants had previous treadmill running
experience and maintained a training regiment averaging 64 kilometers
per week at or faster than 3.8 m·s-1. A written informed
consent was obtained from all subjects prior to participation in
accordance with the University Institutional Review Board policies.
The subjects completed the Moderate Exercise Health Screening Report.
This screening report was designed according to American College
of Sports Medicine guidelines (2000)
to screen for cardiovascular risk factors in subjects associated
with submaximal exercise. Each subject's height, weight, resting
blood pressure, and heart rate were measured. The presence of any
significant risk factor associated with engaging in submaximal exercise
would have prevented a potential subject from participation in the
study.
Equipment
A Woodway Desmo S TreadErgometer treadmill, a Pneumex lift system,
and Z-lift suspension harness (Z-lift Corporation, Austin, TX) were
used in this study. The subjects were fitted to a Z-lift harness
(Figure 1) that was attached
to the Pneumex lift system which lifted each subject by a percentage
of body weight (Figure 2).
Two 60 Hz cameras (JVC TK1380) were positioned 90o apart,
each synchronized to record the subject running on the treadmill
(Figure 3). One camera was
positioned approximately 45o in front of the frontal
plane and the other camera was placed approximately 45o
behind the frontal plane on the subject's left side. Subjects' running
data were collected and analyzed using Peak Motus Version 7.0.1
motion analysis software (Peak Performance Technologies, Inc., Centennial,
CO).
Harness running training
Prior to data collection, the subjects participated in two separate
harness running training sessions to become familiar with the body
weight support (BWS) equipment and condition. Following a brief
warm-up period including stretching and running on the treadmill,
each participant was fitted to the suspension harness. While the
subject straddled the treadmill belt, the treadmill was set at 0%
grade and a speed of 3.8 m·s-1. Each subject ran on the
leveled treadmill for a period of 5 minutes at each of the FWS and
BWS conditions. The FWS and BWS conditions during training were
randomized for all the subjects.
Experimental procedures
The subject reported to the laboratory fully rested, was provided
with a running top and bottom, and ran in their running training
shoe. Each subject was fitted with the Z-lift harness and attached
to the Pneumex lift system. Following a 5-minute treadmill running
warm-up, the subject immediately performed three 3-minute running
trials, one at each of the FWS and BWS conditions: 0 (FWS), 20%
(20S), and 40% (40S) of body weight using the same treadmill grade
and speed as in training. The FWS and BWS running conditions were
randomized across the 10 subjects. The final 30 seconds of each
trial were recorded with two 60 Hz cameras positioned at approximately
90 degrees about the frontal plane.
Data processing and analysis
One running cycle was manually digitized for each FWS (0%) and BWS
(20% or 40%) trials. A 21-point 3-D model was generated using Peak
Motus® 7.0.1. The following landmarks were manually digitized
for each trial: top of head, shoulders, elbow, wrists, 3rd
metacarpals, hips, knees, lateral malleoli, heels, and toes. The
position-time data were filtered using a fourth-order Butterworth
filter at a cutoff frequency of 6 Hz. A residual analysis was used
to determine the cutoff frequency.
From the position-time data, the following variables were derived:
cycle length (CL), cycle frequency (CF), time of contact (TC), hip,
knee, and ankle range of motion in degrees (H-ROM, K-ROM, and A-ROM,
respectively). In addition, vertical displacement of the center
of mass (CM) was calculated using anatomical segmental data published
by de Leva (1996)
as these data corresponded to our subject population. All variables
were measured throughout one running cycle (defined as one full
stride where the point the heel of the foot made contact to next
time the heel of the same foot made contact). Time of contact was
defined as the supported time by a single foot. Measurements that
involved the left and right side were averaged for each subject
before analysis. These measurements included time of contact, hip,
knee, and ankle range of motion.
Statistics
Each variable was analyzed with a repeated measures ANOVA (α=
0.05) to ascertain differences between the supported- and full-weight-bearing
conditions. Subsequent pairwise comparisons (Bonferroni) were used
to further identify which running conditions significantly differ
from each other.
|
| RESULTS |
|
Observation
of mean values showed that all variables, except knee range of motion,
either increased or decreased continuously when progressing from
FWB to 40S (Table 1). As expected,
since treadmill velocity was kept constant, cycle length increased
while cycle frequency decreased with increasing support conditions.
In addition, both hip and ankle angle ranges and COM vertical displacement
decreased with increasing BWS. Statistical comparisons of the various
weight support conditions revealed significant statistical differences
for cycle length, cycle frequency, contact time, hip and ankle range
of motion, and COM vertical displacement at a level of significance
set at 0.05. The significant comparisons resulted in a high power
rating (1.0) for cycle length, cycle frequency, hip and ankle range
of motion and COM vertical displacement and moderate power rating
for contact time (0.701) and ankle range (0.662). The non-significant
knee angle comparison resulted in a low power rating (0.185). All
pairwise comparisons for cycle length, cycle frequency, hip range
of motion, and COM displacement were significant (Table
2). While contact time was found to be significant in the comparison
test, it should be noted that the average values for FWS, 20S and
40S varied by 0.01 seconds. The ankle angle range of motion varied
little between 20S and 40S, and did not yield a significant outcome.
|
| DISCUSSION |
|
The
study aimed to compare FWS to BWS on kinematic measures of treadmill
running with experienced runners. It was hypothesized that BWS treadmill
running would produce significant changes in kinematic measures
compared to FWS treadmill running. Results indicated that, in the
BWS conditions, contact time, associated with a smaller COM vertical
displacement, decreased. In addition, stride frequency, hip, and
ankle angle variables also decreased in comparison to FWS treadmill
running. The knee angle from FWS to BWS conditions did increase
but the change was not significant. Since speed was constant, the
decreased stride frequency was linked to an increase in cycle length
for the BWS conditions. These BWS results are similar to results
found in physical therapy research involved in retraining a disabled
patient's walk or run (Crompton et al, 2001;
Finch et al, 1991;
Lee and Farley, 1998)
and microgravity research that compared kinematic measures of the
walk or run from FWS to BWS (Chang et al, 2000;
2001;
Donelan and Kram, 2000;
Farley and McMahon, 1992;
Kram et al., 1997).
The results of this study indicate that runners may have adjusted
their leg action from FWS across the BWS conditions in a linear
fashion, that is, as more weight is being supported, the hip, knee,
and ankle angle resulted in less leg compression and a straighter
leg through out the running cycle. It has been described that high
stiffness of the leg is achieved by attaining a joint as straight
as possible when the foot is in contact with the ground (Blickman,
1989).
In this study, as more weight is being supported, the runner's leg
stiffness increased because the angular changes in the hip and ankle
decreased while the knee increased which in combination produced
a leg that was straighter during the running cycle.
A closer examination of vertical displacement as it relates to leg
angles, cycle length, and stride frequency throughout one full running
cycle from FWS across the BWS conditions was also conducted. The
runners' vertical displacement was the greatest in the FWS and decreased
as more weight was being supported across the BWS conditions. In
BWS conditions, the harness forces on the runners prevented their
center of mass to drop as compared to the FWS conditions. The runners
adjusted their running to a higher center of mass in the BWS conditions
by less hip and ankle angular displacement while the angular displacement
of the knee increased. These findings were consistent with microgravity
research that reported similar findings involving walkers (Chang
and Kram, 1999;
Chang et al., 2001),
where with less vertical displacement, the hip and ankle during
the swing phase and greater cycle length in the stride enabled the
knee to have a greater extension on foot contact. Effects of supporting
more weight in producing a shorter foot contact time were consistent
with studies (Lee and Farley, 1998)
that used a spring mass model to study running, which predicted
that as leg stiffness increased foot contact time with the ground
would decrease.
Practical issues in using a harness support system and treadmill
may provide insight into how runners might respond to BWS during
athletic training. When systematically displacing the injured weight,
the injured runner experiences a lower angular leg displacement
throughout the running cycling which leads to a lower stretch of
the leg muscles. The runner's stride frequency increases while the
contact with the ground is less. This enables the runner to increase
the amount of running practice with less leg angular change and
foot contact force. The healthy runner may be able to use BWS running
to recover from intense training and competitions due to the lower
musculoskeletal stress from less vertical displacement of weight,
a lower stretch of the leg muscles, and decreased foot contact while
running. The practical significance of contact time change may be
limited for short running bouts, but should not be overlooked during
longer training sessions. For instance, the compounded contact time
on a single foot for a one-hour run at 20S would be decreased by
approximately 50 seconds. The assumed merits of body weight suspended
running in training and recovery from competition merits further
investigation.
|
| CONCLUSIONS |
| This
study compared FWS and BWS on kinematics characteristics with healthy
runners. The kinematic measures of angles of hip, knee, and ankle,
foot contact time, vertical displacement of the center of mass, stride
length and stride frequency were used to analyze each runner's gait.
BWS running produced significant changes in selected kinematic measures.
These changes may provide insight into runners' behavior when using
BWS in training or recovery from competition. Additional investigation
of BWS training affect with competitive runners would be recommended. |
| KEY
POINTS |
- Running
kinematics change gradually with increasing levels of body weight
support.
- At
constant speed, center of mass vertical displacement, lower leg
angular displacement, foot contact time and cycle frequency decrease
significantly from FWS to 40S.
- Harness
running can have beneficial effects in healthy runners recovering
from intense bouts of exercise.
|
| AUTHORS
BIOGRAPHY |
Duane
MILLSLAGLE
Employment: Associate Professor of Motor Behavior at the
University of Minnesota Duluth.
Degree: PhD.
Research interests: Learning and relearning of motor
and sport skills associated with teaching, exercise science,
and physical therapy.
E-mail: dmillsla@d.umn.edu |
|
Morris LEVY
Employment: Assistant Professor of Biomechanics at the University
of Minnesota Duluth.
Degree: PhD.
Research interests: Sports Biomechanics; performance
improvement, injury prevention and rehabilitation.
E-mail: mlevy@d.umn.edu |
|
Nick MATACK
Employment: Graduate Student, Physical Therapy, College
of St-Scholastica, Duluth, MN.
Degree: BAS.
Research interests: Running, injury prevention, and rehabilitation. |
|
|
|
|