0
Research Papers

Foot and Ankle Joint Biomechanical Adaptations to an Unpredictable Coronally Uneven Surface

[+] Author and Article Information
Ava D. Segal

Center for Limb Loss and Mobility,
Department of Veterans Affairs,
1660 S. Columbian Way, MS-151,
Seattle, WA 98108
e-mail: avasegal@gmail.com

Kyle H. Yeates

Center for Limb Loss and Mobility,
Department of Veterans Affairs,
1660 S. Columbian Way, MS-151,
Seattle, WA 98108;
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Washington,
Seattle, WA 98195
e-mail: kyle.yeates@gmail.com

Richard R. Neptune

Mem. ASME
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
The University of Texas at Austin,
Austin, TX 78712
e-mail: rneptune@mail.utexas.edu

Glenn K. Klute

Center for Limb Loss and Mobility,
Department of Veterans Affairs,
1660 S. Columbian Way, MS-151,
Seattle, WA 98108;
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Washington,
Seattle, WA 98195
e-mail: gklute@u.washington.edu

Manuscript received March 13, 2017; final manuscript received August 1, 2017; published online January 17, 2018. Assoc. Editor: Pasquale Vena.

J Biomech Eng 140(3), 031004 (Jan 17, 2018) (9 pages) Paper No: BIO-17-1103; doi: 10.1115/1.4037563 History: Received March 13, 2017; Revised August 01, 2017

Coronally uneven terrain, a common yet challenging feature encountered in daily ambulation, exposes individuals to an increased risk of falling. The foot-ankle complex may adapt to improve balance on uneven terrains, a recovery strategy which may be more challenging in patients with foot-ankle pathologies. A multisegment foot model (MSFM) was used to study the biomechanical adaptations of the foot and ankle joints during a step on a visually obscured, coronally uneven surface. Kinematic, kinetic and in-shoe pressure data were collected as ten participants walked on an instrumented walkway with a surface randomly positioned ±15 deg or 0 deg in the coronal plane. Coronally uneven surfaces altered hindfoot–tibia loading, with more conformation to the surface in early than late stance. Distinct loading changes occurred for the forefoot–hindfoot joint in early and late stance, despite smaller surface conformations. Hindfoot–tibia power at opposite heel contact (@OHC) was generated and increased on both uneven surfaces, whereas forefoot–hindfoot power was absorbed and remained consistent across surfaces. Push-off work increased for the hindfoot–tibia joint on the everted surface and for the forefoot–hindfoot joint on the inverted surface. Net work across joints was generated for both uneven surfaces, while absorbed on flat terrain. The partial decoupling and joint-specific biomechanical adaptations on uneven surfaces suggest that multi-articulating interventions such as prosthetic devices and arthroplasty may improve ambulation for mobility-impaired individuals on coronally uneven terrain.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Li, W. , Keegan, T. H. M. , Sternfeld, B. , Sidney, S. , Quesenberry, C. P., Jr. , and Kelsey, J. L. , 2006, “Outdoor Falls Among Middle-Aged and Older Adults: A Neglected Public Health Problem,” Am. J. Public Health, 96(7), pp. 1192–1200. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Niino, N. , Tsuzuku, S. , Ando, F. , and Shimokata, H. , 2000, “Frequencies and Circumstances of Falls in the National Institute for Longevity Sciences, Longitudinal Study of Aging (NILS-LSA),” J. Epidemiol., 10(Suppl. 1), pp. S90–S94. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Kelsey, J. L. , Procter-Gray, E. , Hannan, M. T. , and Li, W. , 2012, “Heterogeneity of Falls Among Older Adults: Implications for Public Health Prevention,” Am. J. Public Health, 102(11), pp. 2149–2156. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Marigold, D. S. , and Patla, A. E. , 2008, “Age-Related Changes in Gait for Multi-Surface Terrain,” Gait Posture, 27(4), pp. 689–696. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Keegan, T. H. , Kelsey, J. L. , King, A. C. , Quesenberry, C. P., Jr. , and Sidney, S. , 2004, “Characteristics of Fallers Who Fracture at the Foot, Distal Forearm, Proximal Humerus, Pelvis, and Shaft of the Tibia/Fibula Compared With Fallers Who Do Not Fracture,” Am. J. Epidemiol., 159(2), pp. 192–203. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Nieuwenhuijzen, P. H. , and Duysens, J. , 2007, “Proactive and Reactive Mechanisms Play a Role in Stepping on Inverting Surfaces During Gait,” J. Neurophysiol., 98(4), pp. 2266–2273. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Forestier, N. , and Toschi, P. , 2005, “The Effects of an Ankle Destabilization Device on Muscular Activity While Walking,” Int. J. Sports Med., 26(6), pp. 464–470. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Konradsen, L. , Peura, G. , Beynnon, B. , and Renstrom, P. , 2005, “Ankle Eversion Torque Response to Sudden Ankle Inversion Torque Response in Unbraced, Braced, and Pre-Activated Situations,” J. Orthop. Res., 23(2), pp. 315–321. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Damavandi, M. , Dixon, P. C. , and Pearsall, D. J. , 2012, “Ground Reaction Force Adaptations During Cross-Slope Walking and Running,” Hum. Mov. Sci., 31(1), pp. 182–189. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Dixon, P. C. , and Pearsall, D. J. , 2010, “Gait Dynamics on a Cross-Slope Walking Surface,” J. Appl. Biomech., 26(1), pp. 17–25. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Damavandi, M. , Dixon, P. C. , and Pearsall, D. J. , 2010, “Kinematic Adaptations of the Hindfoot, Forefoot, and Hallux During Cross-Slope Walking,” Gait Posture, 32(3), pp. 411–415. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Urry, S. R. , 2002, “Redistribution of Foot Pressure in Healthy Adults During Sideslope Walking,” Foot Ankle Int., 23(12), pp. 1112–1118. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Elftman, H. , 1960, “The Transverse Tarsal Joint and Its Control,” Clin. Orthop., 16, pp. 41–46. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/13819895 [PubMed]
Rolian, C. , Lieberman, D. E. , and Hallgrimsson, B. , 2010, “The Coevolution of Human Hands and Feet,” Evolution, 64(6), pp. 1558–1568. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Bruening, D. A. , Cooney, K. M. , and Buczek, F. L. , 2012, “Analysis of a Kinetic Multi-Segment Foot Model—Part II: Kinetics and Clinical Implications,” Gait Posture, 35(4), pp. 535–540. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
MacWilliams, B. A. , Cowley, M. , and Nicholson, D. E. , 2003, “Foot Kinematics and Kinetics During Adolescent Gait,” Gait Posture, 17(3), pp. 214–224. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Dixon, P. C. , Bohm, H. , and Doderlein, L. , 2012, “Ankle and Midfoot Kinetics During Normal Gait: A Multi-Segment Approach,” J. Biomech., 45(6), pp. 1011–1016. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Bruening, D. A. , Cooney, K. M. , Buczek, F. L. , and Richards, J. G. , 2010, “Measured and Estimated Ground Reaction Forces for Multi-Segment Foot Models,” J. Biomech., 43(16), pp. 3222–3226. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Yeates, K. H. , Segal, A. D. , Neptune, R. R. , and Klute, G. K. , 2016, “Balance and Recovery on Coronally-Uneven and Unpredictable Terrain,” J. Biomech., 49(13), pp. 2734–2740. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Kim, H. , and Ashton-Miller, J. A. , 2012, “A Shoe Sole-Based Apparatus and Method for Randomly Perturbing the Stance Phase of Gait: Test-Retest Reliability in Young Adults,” J. Biomech., 45(10), pp. 1850–1853. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Ottaviani, R. A. , Ashton-Miller, J. A. , Kothari, S. U. , and Wojtys, E. M. , 1995, “Basketball Shoe Height and the Maximal Muscular Resistance to Applied Ankle Inversion and Eversion Moments,” Am. J. Sports Med., 23(4), pp. 418–423. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Ashton-Miller, J. A. , Ottaviani, R. A. , Hutchinson, C. , and Wojtys, E. M. , 1996, “What Best Protects the Inverted Weightbearing Ankle Against Further Inversion? Evertor Muscle Strength Compares Favorably With Shoe Height, Athletic Tape, and Three Orthoses,” Am. J. Sports Med., 24(6), pp. 800–809. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Hurkmans, H. L. , Bussmann, J. B. , Benda, E. , Verhaar, J. A. , and Stam, H. J. , 2006, “Accuracy and Repeatability of the Pedar Mobile System in Long-Term Vertical Force Measurements,” Gait Posture, 23(1), pp. 118–125. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Bruening, D. A. , Cooney, K. M. , and Buczek, F. L. , 2012, “Analysis of a Kinetic Multi-Segment Foot Model—Part I: Model Repeatability and Kinematic Validity,” Gait Posture, 35(4), pp. 529–534. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Simon, J. , Doederlein, L. , McIntosh, A. S. , Metaxiotis, D. , Bock, H. G. , and Wolf, S. I. , 2006, “The Heidelberg Foot Measurement Method: Development, Description and Assessment,” Gait Posture, 23(4), pp. 411–424. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Bishop, C. , Thewlis, D. , Uden, H. , Ogilvie, D. , and Paul, D. , 2011, “A Radiological Method to Determine the Accuracy of Motion Capture Marker Placement on Palpable Anatomical Landmarks Through a Shoe,” Footwear Sci., 3(3), pp. 169–177. [CrossRef]
Sadeghi, H. , Allard, P. , Prince, F. , and Labelle, H. , 2000, “Symmetry and Limb Dominance in Able-Bodied Gait: A Review,” Gait Posture, 12(1), pp. 34–45. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Ferrari, A. , Benedetti, M. G. , Pavan, E. , Frigo, C. , Bettinelli, D. , Rabuffetti, M. , Crenna, P. , and Leardini, A. , 2008, “Quantitative Comparison of Five Current Protocols in Gait Analysis,” Gait Posture, 28(2), pp. 207–216. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Dempster, W. J. , 1955, “Space Requirements for the Seated Operator,” Wright Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, OH, Technical Report No. WADC-TR-55-159. http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/087892.pdf
Winter, D. A. , Patla, A. E. , Frank, J. S. , and Walt, S. E. , 1990, “Biomechanical Walking Pattern Changes in the Fit and Healthy Elderly,” Phys. Ther., 70(6), pp. 340–347. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Winter, D. A. , 1991, “Changes in Gait With Aging,” Can. J. Sport Sci., 16(3), pp. 165–167. [PubMed]
Deschamps, K. , Staes, F. , Roosen, P. , Nobels, F. , Desloovere, K. , Bruyninckx, H. , and Matricali, G. A. , 2011, “Body of Evidence Supporting the Clinical Use of 3D Multisegment Foot Models: A Systematic Review,” Gait Posture, 33(3), pp. 338–349. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Winter, D. A. , 1983, “Energy Generation and Absorption at the Ankle and Knee During Fast, Natural, and Slow Cadences,” Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res., (175), pp. 147–154. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6839580
Hansen, A. H. , Childress, D. S. , Miff, S. C. , Gard, S. A. , and Mesplay, K. P. , 2004, “The Human Ankle During Walking: Implications for Design of Biomimetic Ankle Prostheses,” J. Biomech., 37(10), pp. 1467–1474. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Hothorn, T. , Bretz, F. , and Westfall, P. , 2008, “Simultaneous Inference in General Parametric Models,” Biom. J., 50(3), pp. 346–363. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Bates, D. , Maechler, M. , Bolker, B. , and Walker, S. , 2015, “Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4,” J. Stat. Software, 67(1), pp. 1–48. [CrossRef]
Wright, W. G. , Ivanenko, Y. P. , and Gurfinkel, V. S. , 2012, “Foot Anatomy Specialization for Postural Sensation and Control,” J. Neurophysiol., 107(5), pp. 1513–1521. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Carson, M. C. , Harrington, M. E. , Thompson, N. , O'Connor, J. J. , and Theologis, T. N. , 2001, “Kinematic Analysis of a Multi-Segment Foot Model for Research and Clinical Applications: A Repeatability Analysis,” J. Biomech., 34(10), pp. 1299–1307. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Leardini, A. , O'Connor, J. J. , and Giannini, S. , 2014, “Biomechanics of the Natural, Arthritic, and Replaced Human Ankle Joint,” J. Foot Ankle Res., 7(1), p. 8. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Hof, A. L. , van Bockel, R. M. , Schoppen, T. , and Postema, K. , 2007, “Control of Lateral Balance in Walking. Experimental Findings in Normal Subjects and Above-Knee Amputees,” Gait Posture, 25(2), pp. 250–258. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Perry, J. , ed., 1992, Gait Analysis: Normal and Pathological Function, Slack Inc., Thorofare, NJ.
Zelik, K. E. , La Scaleia, V. , Ivanenko, Y. P. , and Lacquaniti, F. , 2015, “Coordination of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Foot Muscles During Walking,” Eur. J. Appl. Physiol., 115(4), pp. 691–701. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Voloshina, A. S. , Kuo, A. D. , Daley, M. A. , and Ferris, D. P. , 2013, “Biomechanics and Energetics of Walking on Uneven Terrain,” J. Exp Biol., 216(Pt. 21), pp. 3963–3970. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Takahashi, K. Z. , Kepple, T. M. , and Stanhope, S. J. , 2012, “A Unified Deformable (UD) Segment Model for Quantifying Total Power of Anatomical and Prosthetic Below-Knee Structures During Stance in Gait,” J. Biomech., 45(15), pp. 2662–2667. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
van Dieen, J. H. , Spanjaard, M. , Konemann, R. , Bron, L. , and Pijnappels, M. , 2007, “Balance Control in Stepping Down Expected and Unexpected Level Changes,” J. Biomech., 40(16), pp. 3641–3649. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Foot and sensor static marker placement with shoe cutouts to accommodate the in-shoe MSFM. The static sensor markers (red circles) were used to locate the position of the insoles relative to the location of the foot markers. All foot tracking markers were attached directly to the skin. The cuboid and navicular bony landmarks were palpated before subjects donned the shoes. Then markers (white circles) were attached to the shoe upper above the palpated location for the static trial only to define the MTJ center.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Average vertical GRF normalized to body mass (N/kg) across the disturbed step stance phase for three surface conditions: flush, blinded (B.) inversion and B. eversion. The average timing of peak GRF in early stance and late stance, displayed with vertical dashed lines, were similar in timing across conditions. For each trial, the corresponding joint angles and moments at these peak loading events were also extracted (see Fig. 3).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Average coronal plane angles (deg, inversion+) and moments normalized by body mass (N·m/kg, eversion+) across the disturbed step stance phase (%) for three surface conditions: flush, blinded (B.) inversion and B. eversion and three joints: whole foot ankle (AJCWF), hindfoot ankle (AJCHF) and MTJ. The MPJ was modeled with two degrees-of-freedom (2DOF); therefore, only MPJ coronal moments were shown. Vertical dashed lines identify the average timing of peak vertical GRF in early stance and late stance, as shown in Fig. 2.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Average total power normalized by body mass (W/kg, generated+) across the disturbed step stance phase (%) for three surface conditions: flush, blinded (B.) inversion and B. eversion and four joints: whole foot ankle (AJCWF), hindfoot ankle (AJCHF), midtarsal (MTJ), and metatarsophalangeal (MPJ). A vertical dashed line portrays the average percent stance time of the OHC (OHC 79 ± 2%).

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In