TY - JOUR
T1 - Determination of joint moments with instrumented force shoes in a variety of tasks
AU - Faber, G.S.
AU - Kingma, I.
AU - Schepers, H.M.
AU - Veltink, P.H.
AU - van Dieen, J.H.
PY - 2010
Y1 - 2010
N2 - Ground reaction forces (GRFs) are often used in inverse dynamics analyses to determine joint loading. These GRFs are usually measured using force plates (FPs). As an alternative, instrumented force shoes (FSs) can be used, which have the advantage over FPs that they do not constrain foot placement. This study tested the FS system in one normal weight subject (77. kg) performing 19 different lifting, pushing and pulling and walking tasks. Kinematics were measured with an optoelectronic system and the GRFs and the positions of the centre of pressure (CoP) were synchronously measured with FPs and FSs. Differences between the outcomes of the two measurement systems (i.e. CoP and GRFs) and the resulting ankle and L5/S1 joint moments were determined at the instant of the peak GRF (DaPF). For most lifting and pushing and pulling tasks, the difference between the FP and FS measurements remained small: GRF DaPF remained below 3% body weight, CoP DaPF remained below 10. mm, ankle moment DaPF remained below 7% of the peak total ankle moment that occurred during normal walking and L5/S1 moment DaPF remained below 7% of the peak total L5/S1 moment that occurred during normal symmetric lifting. More substantial differences were only found in the maximal pushing tasks. For the walking tasks, peak vertical GRFs were somewhat underestimated. However, differences in ankle and L5/S1 moments remained small, i.e. DaPF below 7% of the peak total moment that occurred during normal walking. © 2010 Elsevier Ltd.
AB - Ground reaction forces (GRFs) are often used in inverse dynamics analyses to determine joint loading. These GRFs are usually measured using force plates (FPs). As an alternative, instrumented force shoes (FSs) can be used, which have the advantage over FPs that they do not constrain foot placement. This study tested the FS system in one normal weight subject (77. kg) performing 19 different lifting, pushing and pulling and walking tasks. Kinematics were measured with an optoelectronic system and the GRFs and the positions of the centre of pressure (CoP) were synchronously measured with FPs and FSs. Differences between the outcomes of the two measurement systems (i.e. CoP and GRFs) and the resulting ankle and L5/S1 joint moments were determined at the instant of the peak GRF (DaPF). For most lifting and pushing and pulling tasks, the difference between the FP and FS measurements remained small: GRF DaPF remained below 3% body weight, CoP DaPF remained below 10. mm, ankle moment DaPF remained below 7% of the peak total ankle moment that occurred during normal walking and L5/S1 moment DaPF remained below 7% of the peak total L5/S1 moment that occurred during normal symmetric lifting. More substantial differences were only found in the maximal pushing tasks. For the walking tasks, peak vertical GRFs were somewhat underestimated. However, differences in ankle and L5/S1 moments remained small, i.e. DaPF below 7% of the peak total moment that occurred during normal walking. © 2010 Elsevier Ltd.
U2 - 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2010.06.005
DO - 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2010.06.005
M3 - Article
SN - 0021-9290
VL - 43
SP - 2848
EP - 2854
JO - Journal of Biomechanics
JF - Journal of Biomechanics
IS - 14
ER -