North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, North Carolina State University, 911 Oval Drive, USA.
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
J Biomech. 2021 Sep 20;126:110621. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2021.110621. Epub 2021 Jul 9.
Recent research has highlighted the complex interactions among chronic injury- or disease-induced joint limitations, walking asymmetry, and increased metabolic cost. Determining the specific metabolic impacts of asymmetry or joint impairment in clinical populations is difficult because of concurrent neurological and physiological changes. This work investigates the metabolic impact of gait asymmetry and joint restriction by unilaterally (asymmetric) and bilaterally (symmetric) restricting ankle, knee, and combined ankle and knee ranges of motion in unimpaired individuals. We calculated propulsive asymmetry, temporal asymmetry, and step-length asymmetry for an average gait cycle; metabolic rate; average positive center of mass power using the individual limbs method; and muscle effort using lower limb electromyography measurements weighted by corresponding physiological cross-sectional areas. Unilateral restriction caused propulsive and temporal asymmetry but less metabolically expensive gait than bilateral restriction. Changes in asymmetry did not correlate with changes in metabolic cost. Interestingly, bilateral restriction increased average positive center of mass power compared to unilateral restriction. Further, increased average positive center of mass power correlated with increased energy costs, suggesting asymmetric step-to-step transitions did not drive metabolic changes. The number of restricted joints reduces available degrees of freedom and may have a larger metabolic impact than gait asymmetry, as this correlated significantly with increases in metabolic rate for 7/9 participants. These results emphasize symmetry is not by definition metabolically optimal, indicate that the mechanics underlying symmetry are meaningful, and suggest that available degrees of freedom should be considered in designing future interventions.
最近的研究强调了慢性损伤或疾病引起的关节限制、步行不对称和代谢成本增加之间的复杂相互作用。由于同时存在神经和生理变化,因此在临床人群中确定不对称或关节损伤的具体代谢影响是困难的。这项工作通过单侧(不对称)和双侧(对称)限制踝关节、膝关节和踝关节与膝关节的组合活动范围,研究了步态不对称和关节限制对代谢的影响。我们计算了平均步态周期的推进不对称性、时间不对称性和步长不对称性;代谢率;使用个体肢体方法计算的平均质心正功率;以及使用相应的生理横截面积加权的下肢肌电图测量值计算的肌肉用力。单侧限制导致推进和时间不对称,但比双侧限制更节省代谢。不对称性的变化与代谢成本的变化没有相关性。有趣的是,与单侧限制相比,双侧限制增加了平均质心正功率。此外,平均质心正功率的增加与能量消耗的增加相关,这表明不对称的步间过渡并没有导致代谢变化。受限关节的数量减少了自由度,可能比步态不对称产生更大的代谢影响,因为这与 7/9 名参与者的代谢率增加显著相关。这些结果强调了对称性在定义上不一定是代谢最优的,表明对称性的力学基础是有意义的,并表明在设计未来的干预措施时应考虑可用的自由度。