Changes of the in vivo kinematics of the human medial longitudinal foot arch, first metatarsophalangeal joint, and the length of plantar fascia in different running patterns

Abstract

Accurately obtaining the in vivo motion of the medial longitudinal arch (MLA), first metatarsophalangeal joint (MTPJ), and plantar fascia (PF) is essential for analyzing the biomechanics of these structures in different running strike patterns. Most previous studies on the biomechanics of the MLA, first MTPJ, and PF have been based on traditional skin-marker–based motion capture, which cannot acquire the natural foot motion. Therefore, this study aimed to 1) describe the movement of the MLA, first MTPJ, and PF during running by using the high-speed dual fluoroscopic imaging system (DFIS) and 2) explore changes of the in vivo kinematics of the MLA and first MTPJ, and the length of the PF during the stance phase of running with different foot strike patterns. Fifteen healthy male runners all of whom ran with a regular rearfoot strike (RFS) pattern were required to run with forefoot strike (FFS) and RFS patterns. Computed tomography scans were taken from each participant’s right foot for the construction of 3D models (the calcaneus, first metatarsal, and first proximal phalanges) and local coordinate systems. A high-speed DFIS (100 Hz) and 3D force platform (2,000 Hz) were used to acquire X-ray images of the foot bones and ground reaction force data during the stance phase of running (3 m/s ± 5%) simultaneously. Then, 3D-2D registration was used to obtain the in vivo kinematic data of the MLA and first MTPJ and the length of the PF. When compared with RFS, in FFS, 1) the range of motion (ROM) of the medial/lateral (5.84 ± 5.61 mm vs. 0.75 ± 3.38 mm, p = 0.002), anterior/posterior (14.64 ± 4.33 mm vs. 11.18 ± 3.56 mm, p = 0.010), plantarflexion/dorsiflexion (7.13 ± 3.22° vs. 1.63 ± 3.29°, p < 0.001), and adduction/abduction (−3.89 ± 3.85° vs. −0.64 ± 4.39°, p = 0.034) motions of the MLA were increased significantly; 2) the ROM of the anterior/posterior (7.81 ± 2.84 mm vs. 6.24 ± 3.43 mm, p = 0.003), superior/inferior (2.11 ± 2.06 mm vs. −0.57 ± 1.65 mm, p = 0.001), and extension/flexion (−9.68 ± 9.16° vs. −5.72 ± 7.33°, p = 0.018) motions of the first MTPJ were increased significantly; 3) the maximum strain (0.093 ± 0.023 vs. 0.075 ± 0.020, p < 0.001) and the maximum power (4.36 ± 1.51 W/kg vs. 3.06 ± 1.39 W/kg, p < 0.001) of the PF were increased significantly. Running with FFS may increase deformation, energy storage, and release of the MLA and PF, as well as the push-off effect of the MTPJ. Meanwhile, the maximum extension angle of the first MTPJ and MLA deformation increased in FFS, which showed that the PF experienced more stretch and potentially indicated that FFS enhanced the PF mechanical responses.

Effects of different habitual foot strike patterns on in vivo kinematics of the first metatarsophalangeal joint during shod running—a statistical parametric mapping study

“…During the CT scan, the participant was in a supine posture, and a rigid immobilization device was adopted to secure the right foot with the shank perpendicular and the ankle angle at 90° ( Zhang et al, 2022 ). The scanning range encompassed a region starting above the ankle joint and extending to the bottom of the calcaneus ( Sun et al, 2022 ; Zhang et al, 2022 ). The acquired images were saved in DICOM format for subsequent three-dimensional (3D) model reconstruction of the first metatarsal and first phalangeal bones.…”

“…Based on the anatomical inertial coordinate system, a local coordinate system for the first metatarsal bone and the first proximal phalanx was established ( Sun et al, 2022 ; Zhang et al, 2022 ). The origin of the coordinate system was set at the centre of the bone mass, while the three coordinate axes were in accordance the principal axes of the bone’s inertia tensor ( Zhang et al, 2022 ).…”

Mechanics of the foot and ankle joints during running using a multi-segment foot model compared with a single-segment model

“…Therefore, if ankle angles are incorrect this will therefore directly influence computed ankle moments, and will impact the moments computed for other joints in the system. While there have been studies of running using more detailed models of the foot [e.g., 19 , 20 ], to date there have been no studies which have compared ankle kinematics and kinetics during running for single and multiple segment foot models to establish any differences.…”

Effect of Weight Bearing on Medial Longitudinal Arch of Foot in Healthy Adults

“…However, the literature's current scope has minimally addressed gender-specific variations in arch dynamics within healthy adult populations. Studies indicate that females typically have higher arches than males, a factor that may influence the MLA's response to weight-bearing scenarios (15,16). The use of Kinovea software for motion analysis, noted for its validity and reliability, marks significant technological advancements in this field (17-20).…”