2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2015.03.004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

One- and multi-segment foot models lead to opposite results on ankle joint kinematics during gait: Implications for clinical assessment

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

3
41
1

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 59 publications
(46 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
3
41
1
Order By: Relevance
“…However, we found no changes in muscle morphology, indicating that changes in passive ankle ROM during gait were not because of morphological changes in the GM. This finding is also supported by recent studies of Pothrat et al and Kalkman et al in which changes in φ FoSo did not correspond to length changes of the triceps surae muscles …”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 86%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…However, we found no changes in muscle morphology, indicating that changes in passive ankle ROM during gait were not because of morphological changes in the GM. This finding is also supported by recent studies of Pothrat et al and Kalkman et al in which changes in φ FoSo did not correspond to length changes of the triceps surae muscles …”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 86%
“…During passive ankle ROM assessment with a maximally externally applied 4 Nm dorsiflexion footplate moment, almost half of the φ FoSo ROM was accounted for by flexion within the foot. Therefore, it is expected that during gait, when much higher loads are imposed, foot flexibility will explain a substantial fraction of φ FoSo change . Altogether, our findings question whether the treatment goal of increasing ankle ROM in this case was achieved.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 68%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In addition, Pothrat et al found that use of a MFM compared to a SFM produced different ankle kinematics during gait. Specifically, these authors reported greater ankle dorsiflexion angles and lower varus angles in the SFM than in the MFM . Furthermore, Dixon et al showed that an SFM significantly overestimated the maximum power and angular velocity of the ankle joint compared with an MFM during normal gait, which led them to recommend the use of MFM when making decisions for surgical interventions.…”
mentioning
confidence: 98%
“…In conditions of natural locomotion foot serves as support and ensures organization of spring interactions of human body with surface. It means that in foot motor mechanisms great potentials of spring-ductile properties of the whole lower limb are embedded [1,5,11,12,[28][29][30][31].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%