Three-point gait crutch walking: Variability in ground reaction force during weight bearing

Li S, Armstrong CW, Cipriani D. Three-point gait crutch walking: variability in ground reaction force during weight bearing. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2001;82:86-92. Objective: To investigate variability in ground reaction force (GRF) and kinematics on both sides during 3-point partial weight-bearing (P...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation 2001-01, Vol.82 (1), p.86-92
Hauptverfasser: Li, Sheng, Armstrong, Charles W., Cipriani, Daniel
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Li S, Armstrong CW, Cipriani D. Three-point gait crutch walking: variability in ground reaction force during weight bearing. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2001;82:86-92. Objective: To investigate variability in ground reaction force (GRF) and kinematics on both sides during 3-point partial weight-bearing (PWB) crutch walking. Design: Within-subject comparisons of kinematic and kinetic data collected at different levels of 3-point crutch walking: 10%, 50%, and 90% PWB at comfortable speeds. Setting: An applied biomechanics lab in a university setting.An applied biomechanics lab in a university setting. Participants: Twelve healthy college students (9 women, 3 men). Main Outcome Measures: Spatial and temporal variables, major peak kinematic data, and peak GRFs from force platforms during the gait cycle. Results: Large variations were found in replicating the target levels of PWB, particularly at 10% and 90% PWB. Subjects had a shorter stance phase and longer swing phase during the crutch walking gait cycle. Velocity significantly decreased (p =.006) because of decreased cadence (p =.002). Slightly greater hip abduction and external rotation on the noninvolved side and slightly less hip adduction and internal rotation on the involved side indicated that the center of gravity shifted slightly from the involved side toward the noninvolved side. There was no increase in vertical GRF, and there was a relatively constant loading pattern on the noninvolved side. Conclusions: Subjects have difficulty replicating a prescribed weight-bearing restriction. A shift of the center of gravity toward the noninvolved side may reduce the weight distribution on the involved side. © 2001 by the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine and the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
ISSN:0003-9993
1532-821X
DOI:10.1053/apmr.2001.16347