首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Biomechanics >The high frequency component of the vertical ground reaction force is a valid surrogate measure of the impact peak
【24h】

The high frequency component of the vertical ground reaction force is a valid surrogate measure of the impact peak

机译:垂直地面反作用力的高频分量是冲击峰的有效替代量度

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Identification of the impact peak (IP) from the vertical ground reaction force (vGRF) is required to calculate indices of impact loading during running. The IP, however, is not always clearly discernible. Previous researchers have estimated the timing of the IP using surrogate methods, the most common of which is a set time point of 13% stance (TPS). Information contained within the high frequency (HiF) component of the vGRF may also have a utility as a surrogate measure, but the validity of either approach is currently unknown. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the criterion validity for a newly proposed HiF method and the previously used TPS method against a criterion measure for a group of rear-foot striking runners. Fifty participants ran at a standardized speed (33 m.s(-1)) on an instrumented treadmill. Five consecutive stance phases were analyzed for the participant's dominant limb. Bland-Altman was used to assess agreement between the criterion method and each surrogate method. Good agreement of the HiF and TPS methods with the criterion method indicate that both methods are likely to be valid surrogate approaches to estimate vGRF impact loading indices. For all impact loading indices, smaller bias and limits of agreement (LOA) were observed with the HiF method when compared to the TPS method. Therefore, it is concluded that the HiF method should be used in preference to the TPS method when it is available. Crown Copyright (C) 2015 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
机译:需要从垂直地面反作用力(vGRF)识别冲击峰(IP),以计算跑步过程中的冲击负荷指标。但是,IP并非始终清晰可辨。先前的研究人员已经使用代理方法估计了IP的时间安排,其中最常见的是设定时间点为13%立场(TPS)。 vGRF的高频(HiF)组件中包含的信息也可以作为替代手段,但目前尚不清楚这两种方法的有效性。这项研究的目的是针对一组后脚打击赛跑者的标准度量来评估新提出的HiF方法和先前使用的TPS方法的标准有效性。五十名参与者在标准的跑步机上以标准速度(33 m.s(-1))奔跑。对参与者的优势肢体分析了五个连续的姿态阶段。使用Bland-Altman评估标准方法与每种替代方法之间的一致性。 HiF和TPS方法与标准方法的良好一致性表明,这两种方法都可能是估计vGRF冲击负荷指数的有效替代方法。对于所有冲击负荷指数,与TPS方法相比,HiF方法观察到较小的偏差和一致限(LOA)。因此,可以得出结论:HiF方法在可用时应优先于TPS方法使用。 Crown版权所有(C)2015,由Elsevier Ltd.发行。保留所有权利。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号