The continued increase in running popularity has led to a subsequent increase in the need to assess running gait more easily and affordably. Although traditional measurement devices such as motion capture systems, force plates, and electromyography are adequate methods of gait analysis, they suffer from several limitations, such as expense and lack of portability. Recent technological advances have made available more viable options such as accelerometers, electrogoniometers, gyroscopes, and in-shoe pressure sensors. These sensors are being used more commonly to acquire the same information as the more traditional systems, without the associated limitations. Combined with wireless technology and/or data loggers, they provide an affordable, lightweight alternative to gait analysis, allowing data collection over prolonged periods of time in almost any environment. This article will review the current technologies used in the analysis of running gait, with a focus upon the latest developments and equipment.
. The consistent patterns of strain changes with running slope are evidence that strain pattern is modulated to meet the changes in demand for net mechanical work. The relatively poor relationship between strain and running speed may reflect the fact that changes in running speed during level running are not associated with a change in demand for net mechanical work. Taken together, the speed and slope results suggest that the demand for mechanical work is an important determinant of muscle length patterns in running and walking.
While resistance exercise (REX) reduces ankle extensor (AE) mass and strength deficits during short-term unloading; additional treatments, concurrently administered with REX, are required to attenuate the greater losses seen with longer unloading periods. Subjects performed left leg REX, which otherwise refrained from ambulatory and weight-bearing activity for 40 days, while randomized to a capsule (placebo, albuterol) dosing regimen with no crossover to note whether albuterol helps REX mitigate unloading-induced AE losses. A third group of subjects served as unloaded controls. On days 0, 20, and 40, the following data were collected from the left leg: calf cross-sectional area and AE strength measures. Cross-sectional area was estimated using anthropometric methodology, whereas AE strength data were obtained from eight unilateral calf-press repetitions on an inertial-based REX device. Repeated-measures mixed-factorial 3 x 3 analyses of covariance, with day 0 values as a covariate, revealed group x time interactions for the strength variables eccentric total work (ETW) and average power (EAP). Tukey's honestly significant difference shows REX-placebo subjects incurred significant ETW and EAP losses by day 40, whereas the REX-albuterol treatment evoked strength gains to those same variables without concurrent muscle accretion. Corresponding concentric variables did not display similar changes. Day 40 control data significantly declined for many variables; relative to the REX-albuterol treatment, some losses were significant after 20 days. ETW and EAP gains to unloaded AE may be due to one or more mechanisms. Continued research identifying mechanisms responsible for such changes, as well as the safety of REX-albuterol administration in other models, is warranted.
The present study sought to create a scaling-derived cycle ergometer protocol (SDP) that was derived theoretically and would correlate highly with actual uphill time-trial (TT) cycling performance. Local competitive cyclists each completed the SDP (an incremental test to exhaustion) using their own bicycle mounted on a stationary trainer, together with either a short (6.2 km, 2.9% grade; n = 8 men and 5 women) or long-course (12.5 km, 2.7% grade; n = 8 men) uphill TT. Maximal power output (Wmax) and power at the ventilatory threshold (WVT) were determined from the SDP results, as well as maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max), using standard indirect calorimetry procedures. Actual TT speed correlated very highly with both SDP completion time (r = 0.97-0.98) and relative Wmax (watts per kilogram; r = 0.92-0.97) for both uphill TT races. Correlations between TT speed and more demanding measurements (VO2max, WVT) (VO2max, WVT) were generally lower and more variable (r = 0.54-0.97). These results would indicate that two non-laboratory dependent measurements (SDP completion time and relative Wmax) derived from the SDP are valid markers for predicting actual uphill TT performance. This protocol may be useful to cycling coaches and athletes in identifying talented cyclists or for tracking changes in cycling performance outside of the sports science laboratory environment.
Hind-limb-suspended rats incur attenuated bone loss with beta(2)-agonists, and humans note similar changes with concurrent resistance exercise. To examine if the beta(2)-agonist albuterol helps resistance exercise reduce unloading-induced bone loss, human subjects performed 40 days of unilateral limb suspension with their left legs, otherwise refraining from normal ambulatory activity. While performing left leg strength training 3 days.week(-1), subjects received a concurrent placebo or albuterol (16 mg.day(-1)) treatment. Left leg muscle and bone changes were analyzed with 2 x 2 analyses of covariance (ANCOVAs). Mechanical loading values were calculated from workouts and compared using a 2 x 5 analysis of variance (ANOVA) and a Tukey post hoc test. The resistance exercise-albuterol assignment evoked significant (p < 0.05) left leg bone mineral content (BMC) gains (+2.24%) after 40 days. During the final unloading days, the resistance exercise-placebo group's mechanical loading data declined (-13.91%) significantly (p < 0.05) versus initial values. A resistance exercise-albuterol assignment likely increased BMC by maintaining the mechanical loading stimulus.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.