Robbins S E, Gouw G J
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1991 Feb;23(2):217-24.
Modern athletic footwear provides remarkable plantar comfort when walking, running, or jumping. However, when injurious plantar loads elicit negligible perceived plantar discomfort, a perceptual illusion is created whereby perceived impact is lower than actual impact, which results in inadequate impact-moderating behavior and consequent injury. The objective of this study was to examine how plantar tactile (mechanical) events affect perceived plantar discomfort. Also, we evaluated the feasibility of a footwear safety standard we propose, which requires elimination of the above illusion. Twenty subjects gave numerical estimates of plantar discomfort produced by simulated locomotion (concurrent vertical (0.1-0.7 kg.cm-2) and horizontal (0.1-0.9 kg.cm-2) plantar loads), with the foot supported by either a smooth rigid surface or a rigid surface with 2 mm high rigid irregularities. Vertical or horizontal load alone evoked no discomfort (P greater than 0.05), whereas together, discomfort emanated from loads as low as 0.4 kg.cm-2. Irregularities heightened discomfort by a factor of 1.89. This suggests that the proposed safety standard is feasible, since compliance could be achieved simply by adding surface irregularities to insoles and by other changes that heighten localized plantar loads. However, until this standard is adhered to, it might be more appropriate to classify athletic footwear as "safety hazards" rather than "protective devices".
现代运动鞋在行走、跑步或跳跃时能提供出色的足底舒适度。然而，当有害的足底负荷引发的可感知足底不适微乎其微时，就会产生一种感知错觉，即感知到的冲击力低于实际冲击力，这会导致冲击缓解行为不足并进而造成损伤。本研究的目的是探讨足底触觉（机械）事件如何影响可感知的足底不适。此外，我们评估了我们提出的一项鞋类安全标准的可行性，该标准要求消除上述错觉。20名受试者对模拟运动（同时施加垂直（0.1 - 0.7千克·厘米⁻²）和水平（0.1 - 0.9千克·厘米⁻²）足底负荷）产生的足底不适进行了数值估计，足部支撑在光滑刚性表面或带有2毫米高刚性凸起的刚性表面上。单独的垂直或水平负荷不会引起不适（P大于0.05），而两者同时施加时，低至0.4千克·厘米⁻²的负荷就会产生不适。凸起使不适感增强了1.89倍。这表明所提议的安全标准是可行的，因为只需通过在鞋垫上增加表面凸起以及通过其他增加局部足底负荷的改变就能实现符合标准。然而，在该标准得到遵守之前，将运动鞋归类为“安全隐患”而非“防护装置”可能更为合适。
