Peters Helen, Deschamps Kevin, Matricali Giovanni Arnoldo, Staes Filip
KU Leuven, Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation Research Group, Belgium.
KU Leuven, Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation Research Group, Belgium; KU Leuven, Laboratory for Clinical Motion Analysis, University Hospital Pellenberg, Belgium; Parnasse-ISEI, Department of Podiatry, Avenue E. Mounier, 84 - 1200 Bruxelles, Belgium; Artevelde University College Ghent, Department of Podiatry, Ghent, Belgium.
Gait Posture. 2017 Mar;53:127-130. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2017.01.009. Epub 2017 Jan 16.
The literature lacks comparative data regarding foot segmental mobility in rearfoot (RFS) and midfoot striking (MFS) patterns. The aim of the study is to quantify the foot segmental mobility during distinct subphases of stance in presence of both striking patterns.
Twelve participants were instructed to run barefoot at a constant speed of 3.3m/s on a 10-m walkway, while adopting a RFS and a MFS pattern. Multi-segment foot mobility during the impact phase, the absorption phase and the generation phase was subsequently calculated and compared between both conditions.
In the impact phase of the MFS trials, a higher sagittal plane range of motion was observed between shank and calcaneus (RFS=6.2°, MFS=14.5°, p<0.0001), between calcaneus and midfoot (RFS=1.9°, MFS=5.6°, p=0.002) as well as between the calcaneus and metatarsus (RFS=2.4°, MFS=4.9°, p=0.0015). In the absorption phase of the MFS trials, a higher frontal plane range of motion (RFS=1.3°, MFS=2.1°, p=0.004) and a lower sagittal plane range of motion (RFS=6.5°, MFS=4.3°, p=0.004) was observed between the calcaneus and metatarsus.
This study revealed that approximately 50% of the rearfoot range of motion has been observed in the midfoot when running with both striking patterns, although the highest ROM was observed in the rearfoot. This finding highlights that the rebounding effect of the human body results not only from absorption and generation within major joints of the lower limb but also from smaller joints in the foot.
关于后足着地（RFS）和中足着地（MFS）模式下足部节段性活动度的比较数据在文献中较为缺乏。本研究的目的是量化在两种着地模式下站立不同子阶段的足部节段性活动度。
12名参与者被要求在10米长的通道上以3.3米/秒的恒定速度赤脚跑步，同时采用RFS和MFS模式。随后计算并比较了两种情况下在撞击阶段、吸收阶段和产生阶段的多节段足部活动度。
在MFS试验的撞击阶段，在小腿和跟骨之间观察到更高的矢状面活动度范围（RFS = 6.2°，MFS = 14.5°，p < 0.0001），跟骨和中足之间（RFS = 1.9°，MFS = 5.6°，p = 0.002）以及跟骨和跖骨之间（RFS = 2.4°，MFS = 4.9°，p = 0.0015）。在MFS试验的吸收阶段，在跟骨和跖骨之间观察到更高的额状面活动度范围（RFS = 1.3°，MFS = 2.1°，p = 0.004）和更低的矢状面活动度范围（RFS = 6.5°，MFS = 4.3°，p = 0.004）。
本研究表明，在两种着地模式下跑步时，约50%的后足活动度范围出现在中足，尽管后足的活动度范围最大。这一发现突出表明，人体的反弹效应不仅源于下肢主要关节的吸收和产生，还源于足部的较小关节。
