The differences between legs in walking and running



The differences between legs in walking and running% of?variance?in ML foot?placement that can be explained by ML trunk CoM state (R2)Very small, nonsignificant differences were found between right and left legs for R2 during swing phases of walking and running (Fig 1). Fig 1. A. % of?variance?in ML foot?placement that can be explained by ML trunk CoM state (R2) in walking and running. B. The differences of R2 between left and right legs in walking and runinng.We calculated the average of R2 over legs in walking and running because our results indicated very small, nonsignificant differences between legs during swing phase (Fig 1.). Then, the effect of running speed on this parameter was considered:The effect of running speeds (2.08, 2.50, and 2.92 m.s-1) on:% of?variance?in ML foot?placement that can be explained by ML trunk CoM state (R2)Very small, nonsignificant differences of R2 were found between different running speeds (Fig 2.). Fig 2. A. % of?variance?in ML foot?placement that can be explained by ML trunk CoM state (R2) in running with three different speeds [2.08, 2.50, and 2.92 m/s]. B. The effect of running speeds (2.08, 2.50, and 2.92 m/s) on R2. The shaded regions indicate standard deviation of R2. We calculated the average of R2 over running speed because our results indicated very small, nonsignificant differences of R2 between running speeds (Fig 2.). Step widthThe main effects of speed on step width was significant in running (F (1, 2) = 9.25, p = 0.002) (Fig 3.), however, because step width for all running speeds was higher/lower than during walking, this would not lead to interesting interaction effects. Thus, step width was also averaged over running speeds. Fig 3. Effect of speed on step width.Step width variabilityThere was no significant main effect of speed on step width variability in running (F (1, 2) = 1.48, p = 0.254) (Fig 4.).Fig 4. Effect of speed on step width variability.We calculated the average of step width variability over running speeds because our results indicated no significant differences of step width variability between running speeds (Fig 4.). Then the differences of R2, step width, and step width variability between walking and running were considered.Energy costEnergy costs of ML stability control in walking and running was also investigated. Reduced energy costs in stabilized condition would support that the control of ML stabilization requires energy consumption and differential effects between walking and running might indicate differences in these costs between these modes of locomotion. Since energy cost is not directly related to foot placement strategy, which is the main focus of this study, all the information about this parameter can be read below: InstrumentsBreath-by-breath oxygen consumption was also obtained from a pulmonary gas exchange system (Cosmed K4b2, Cosmed, Italy).Data processingOxygen uptake (VO2; ml min-1) and respiratory exchange ratio (RER) were determined with the pulmonary gas exchange system during the last minute of each trial. The metabolic rate reached a plateau within the 5- minutes trial, as was confirmed through visual inspection. We calculated gross metabolic rate (Egross; J kg-1 min-1) as ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Garby</Author><Year>1987</Year><RecNum>25</RecNum><DisplayText>[3]</DisplayText><record><rec-number>25</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app="EN" db-id="5we0zvtfdf5srtertfjvax5rvr5w2e20z2xf" timestamp="1519111503">25</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name="Journal Article">17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Garby, L</author><author>Astrup, A</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>The relationship between the respiratory quotient and the energy equivalent of oxygen during simultaneous glucose and lipid oxidation and lipogenesis</title><secondary-title>Acta Physiologica Scandinavica</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>Acta Physiologica Scandinavica</full-title><abbr-1>Acta Physiol Scand</abbr-1></periodical><pages>443-444</pages><volume>129</volume><number>3</number><dates><year>1987</year></dates><isbn>1365-201X</isbn><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>[3]: Egross=((4.940?RER+16.40)?VO2)/body mass (kg)Resting metabolic rate, determined with the same method as we did for gross metabolic rate during seated position for 5 min prior to the trials, was subtracted from gross metabolic rate to calculate net metabolic rate during walking and running. To calculate net energy cost (EC; J kg-1 m-1), net metabolic rate was divided by speed (m min-1).Statistical analysisThe main effect of speed on energy cost were not significant in running ( F (1, 2) = 0.214, p=0.809) (Fig 5.).Fig 5. Effect of speed on energy cost.Because our results indicated no significant effect of speed on energy cost in running, we calculated the average of energy cost over running speeds.Next, in line with hypothesis 2, we tested the difference between normal walking and running by paired t-test. To test our third and fourth hypothesis, a two-way repeated analysis of variance with conditions (normal vs stabilized) and mode of locomotion (walking vs running) as within-subject factors was conducted to evaluate the effect of external lateral stabilization, mode of locomotion and interaction (mode of locomotion X condition) on energy cost. Fig 6. Condition effect: The effect of external lateral stabilization on energy cost in walking and running. # represents the significant differences of energy cost between normal and stabilized conditions (based on the results of Bonferroni post-hoc). * represents the significant differences of energy cost between normal walking and running (based on the results of paired t-test). Error bars represent standard deviation.ResultsAs expected, the energy cost was significantly higher in running than walking (t (1, 9) = -11.30, p<0.001). However, in contrast with expectations, energy costs were significantly higher in the stabilized conditions (condition effect; F (1, 9) = 5.81, p = 0.039), and the increase in energy costs with external lateral stabilization was more pronounced in running than in walking (interaction effect; F (1, 9) = 6.84, p = 0.028).(Fig 6.). DiscussionWe measured energy to assess costs of stability control. Reduced energy costs in stabilized walking would support that ML stabilization is an active process and differential effects between walking and running might indicate differences in these costs between these modes of locomotion. Previous studies reported mixed results on the effects of external lateral stabilization on energy costs. Several studies reported significant effects of stabilization. Donelan et al. ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Donelan</Author><Year>2004</Year><RecNum>3</RecNum><DisplayText>[6]</DisplayText><record><rec-number>3</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app="EN" db-id="dvszwf05dssa9feaeza5zazur5x5afv0zdtv" timestamp="1519111698">3</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name="Journal Article">17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Donelan, J Maxwell</author><author>Shipman, David W</author><author>Kram, Rodger</author><author>Kuo, Arthur D</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Mechanical and metabolic requirements for active lateral stabilization in human walking</title><secondary-title>Journal of biomechanics</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>Journal of biomechanics</full-title></periodical><pages>827-835</pages><volume>37</volume><number>6</number><dates><year>2004</year></dates><isbn>0021-9290</isbn><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>[6] reported a significant 5.7% and 9.2% reduction in EC during preferred and zero step width conditions respectively, while walking with arm swing restriction. Ortega et al. ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Ortega</Author><Year>2008</Year><RecNum>6</RecNum><DisplayText>[7]</DisplayText><record><rec-number>6</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app="EN" db-id="dvszwf05dssa9feaeza5zazur5x5afv0zdtv" timestamp="1519111699">6</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name="Journal Article">17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Ortega, Justus D</author><author>Fehlman, Leslie A</author><author>Farley, Claire T</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Effects of aging and arm swing on the metabolic cost of stability in human walking</title><secondary-title>Journal of biomechanics</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>Journal of biomechanics</full-title></periodical><pages>3303-3308</pages><volume>41</volume><number>16</number><dates><year>2008</year></dates><isbn>0021-9290</isbn><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>[7] also reported significant effects of lateral stabilization on EC in walking. Perhaps this study was most similar in set-up to our study; participants were allowed familiarization, walked with preferred step width, and participants were allowed normal arm swing. With arm swing the effect of lateral stabilization was slightly lower (a significant 3-4% reduction), compared to walking without arm swing (a significant 6-7% reduction). Arellano et al. reported significant 5.5% and 2% reductions in EC while walking and running, respectively, without arm swing at a zero target step width ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Arellano</Author><Year>2011</Year><RecNum>4</RecNum><DisplayText>[8]</DisplayText><record><rec-number>4</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app="EN" db-id="5we0zvtfdf5srtertfjvax5rvr5w2e20z2xf" timestamp="1519111493">4</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name="Journal Article">17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Arellano, Christopher J</author><author>Kram, Rodger</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>The energetic cost of maintaining lateral balance during human running</title><secondary-title>Journal of Applied Physiology</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>Journal of Applied Physiology</full-title><abbr-1>J Appl Physiol</abbr-1></periodical><pages>427-434</pages><volume>112</volume><number>3</number><dates><year>2011</year></dates><isbn>8750-7587</isbn><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>[8]. In contrast, Dean et al. ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Dean</Author><Year>2007</Year><RecNum>4</RecNum><DisplayText>[5]</DisplayText><record><rec-number>4</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app="EN" db-id="dvszwf05dssa9feaeza5zazur5x5afv0zdtv" timestamp="1519111699">4</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name="Journal Article">17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Dean, Jesse C</author><author>Alexander, Neil B</author><author>Kuo, Arthur D</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>The effect of lateral stabilization on walking in young and old adults</title><secondary-title>IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering</full-title></periodical><pages>1919-1926</pages><volume>54</volume><number>11</number><dates><year>2007</year></dates><isbn>0018-9294</isbn><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>[5] did not find a significant reduction in EC during walking with stabilization at preferred step width, although they did find an effect in a prescribed zero step width condition. IJmker et al. ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Ijmker</Author><Year>2013</Year><RecNum>5</RecNum><DisplayText>[1]</DisplayText><record><rec-number>5</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app="EN" db-id="dvszwf05dssa9feaeza5zazur5x5afv0zdtv" timestamp="1519111699">5</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name="Journal Article">17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Ijmker, Trienke</author><author>Houdijk, Han</author><author>Lamoth, Claudine JC</author><author>Beek, Peter J</author><author>van der Woude, Lucas HV</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Energy cost of balance control during walking decreases with external stabilizer stiffness independent of walking speed</title><secondary-title>Journal of biomechanics</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>Journal of biomechanics</full-title></periodical><pages>2109-2114</pages><volume>46</volume><number>13</number><dates><year>2013</year></dates><isbn>0021-9290</isbn><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>[1] reported a significant reduction in EC during walking with stabilization, but only after removal of an outlier. In a second study by IJmker et al. ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>IJmker</Author><Year>2014</Year><RecNum>12</RecNum><DisplayText>[9]</DisplayText><record><rec-number>12</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app="EN" db-id="dvszwf05dssa9feaeza5zazur5x5afv0zdtv" timestamp="1519111702">12</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name="Journal Article">17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>IJmker, T</author><author>Noten, S</author><author>Lamoth, CJ</author><author>Beek, PJ</author><author>van der Woude, LHV</author><author>Houdijk, H</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Can external lateral stabilization reduce the energy cost of walking in persons with a lower limb amputation?</title><secondary-title>Gait &amp; posture</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>Gait &amp; posture</full-title></periodical><pages>616-621</pages><volume>40</volume><number>4</number><dates><year>2014</year></dates><isbn>0966-6362</isbn><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>[9] with able-bodied participants and people with a lower limb prosthesis, the effect of stabilization failed to reach significance. While it was speculated that the lateral stabilization might impede functional medio-lateral motion in amputees, no satisfying explanation was provided for the lack of effect in the control group. These conflicting findings in literature, may be explained by differences in experimental conditions or designs. To investigate whether external lateral stabilization reduces the energy cost during walking and in which conditions, further analyses such as meta-regression could to be performed on data from the studies mentioned. Our results showed that foot placement is used to control ML stability in walking and running. The energy cost of this strategy appears to be low, as the decrease in the use of the foot placement strategy during stabilized walking and running did not lead to decreases in energy costs. Instead, energy costs slightly increased, especially during running. Unintended effects of the external stabilization, e.g. on propulsion may have outweighed the benefits. Low energy costs may explain why foot placement is likely to be preferred over other stability control strategies, such as control through ankle moments PEVuZE5vdGU+PENpdGU+PEF1dGhvcj5CcnVpam48L0F1dGhvcj48WWVhcj4yMDE4PC9ZZWFyPjxS

ZWNOdW0+NDU8L1JlY051bT48RGlzcGxheVRleHQ+WzEwLTEyXTwvRGlzcGxheVRleHQ+PHJlY29y

ZD48cmVjLW51bWJlcj40NTwvcmVjLW51bWJlcj48Zm9yZWlnbi1rZXlzPjxrZXkgYXBwPSJFTiIg

ZGItaWQ9IjV3ZTB6dnRmZGY1c3J0ZXJ0Zmp2YXg1cnZyNXcyZTIwejJ4ZiIgdGltZXN0YW1wPSIx

NTI4ODgzNjg2Ij40NTwva2V5PjwvZm9yZWlnbi1rZXlzPjxyZWYtdHlwZSBuYW1lPSJKb3VybmFs

IEFydGljbGUiPjE3PC9yZWYtdHlwZT48Y29udHJpYnV0b3JzPjxhdXRob3JzPjxhdXRob3I+QnJ1

aWpuLCBTam9lcmQgTTwvYXV0aG9yPjxhdXRob3I+dmFuIERpZcOrbiwgSmFhcCBIPC9hdXRob3I+

PC9hdXRob3JzPjwvY29udHJpYnV0b3JzPjx0aXRsZXM+PHRpdGxlPkNvbnRyb2wgb2YgaHVtYW4g

Z2FpdCBzdGFiaWxpdHkgdGhyb3VnaCBmb290IHBsYWNlbWVudDwvdGl0bGU+PHNlY29uZGFyeS10

aXRsZT5Kb3VybmFsIG9mIFRoZSBSb3lhbCBTb2NpZXR5IEludGVyZmFjZTwvc2Vjb25kYXJ5LXRp

dGxlPjwvdGl0bGVzPjxwZXJpb2RpY2FsPjxmdWxsLXRpdGxlPkpvdXJuYWwgb2YgVGhlIFJveWFs

IFNvY2lldHkgSW50ZXJmYWNlPC9mdWxsLXRpdGxlPjxhYmJyLTE+SiBSIFNvYyBJbnRlcmZhY2U8

L2FiYnItMT48L3BlcmlvZGljYWw+PHBhZ2VzPjIwMTcwODE2PC9wYWdlcz48dm9sdW1lPjE1PC92

b2x1bWU+PG51bWJlcj4xNDM8L251bWJlcj48ZGF0ZXM+PHllYXI+MjAxODwveWVhcj48L2RhdGVz

Pjxpc2JuPjE3NDItNTY4OTwvaXNibj48dXJscz48L3VybHM+PC9yZWNvcmQ+PC9DaXRlPjxDaXRl

PjxBdXRob3I+UmVpbWFubjwvQXV0aG9yPjxZZWFyPjIwMTg8L1llYXI+PFJlY051bT40ODwvUmVj

TnVtPjxyZWNvcmQ+PHJlYy1udW1iZXI+NDg8L3JlYy1udW1iZXI+PGZvcmVpZ24ta2V5cz48a2V5

IGFwcD0iRU4iIGRiLWlkPSI1d2UwenZ0ZmRmNXNydGVydGZqdmF4NXJ2cjV3MmUyMHoyeGYiIHRp

bWVzdGFtcD0iMTUyOTQwNzMxMiI+NDg8L2tleT48L2ZvcmVpZ24ta2V5cz48cmVmLXR5cGUgbmFt

ZT0iSm91cm5hbCBBcnRpY2xlIj4xNzwvcmVmLXR5cGU+PGNvbnRyaWJ1dG9ycz48YXV0aG9ycz48

YXV0aG9yPlJlaW1hbm4sIEhlbmRyaWs8L2F1dGhvcj48YXV0aG9yPkZldHRyb3csIFR5bGVyPC9h

dXRob3I+PGF1dGhvcj5KZWthLCBKb2huIEo8L2F1dGhvcj48L2F1dGhvcnM+PC9jb250cmlidXRv

cnM+PHRpdGxlcz48dGl0bGU+U3RyYXRlZ2llcyBmb3IgdGhlIGNvbnRyb2wgb2YgYmFsYW5jZSBk

dXJpbmcgbG9jb21vdGlvbjwvdGl0bGU+PHNlY29uZGFyeS10aXRsZT5LaW5lc2lvbG9neSBSZXZp

ZXc8L3NlY29uZGFyeS10aXRsZT48L3RpdGxlcz48cGVyaW9kaWNhbD48ZnVsbC10aXRsZT5LaW5l

c2lvbG9neSBSZXZpZXc8L2Z1bGwtdGl0bGU+PC9wZXJpb2RpY2FsPjxwYWdlcz4xOC0yNTwvcGFn

ZXM+PHZvbHVtZT43PC92b2x1bWU+PG51bWJlcj4xPC9udW1iZXI+PGRhdGVzPjx5ZWFyPjIwMTg8

L3llYXI+PC9kYXRlcz48aXNibj4yMTYzLTA0NTM8L2lzYm4+PHVybHM+PC91cmxzPjwvcmVjb3Jk

PjwvQ2l0ZT48Q2l0ZT48QXV0aG9yPkhvZjwvQXV0aG9yPjxZZWFyPjIwMTg8L1llYXI+PFJlY051

bT41MDwvUmVjTnVtPjxyZWNvcmQ+PHJlYy1udW1iZXI+NTA8L3JlYy1udW1iZXI+PGZvcmVpZ24t

a2V5cz48a2V5IGFwcD0iRU4iIGRiLWlkPSI1d2UwenZ0ZmRmNXNydGVydGZqdmF4NXJ2cjV3MmUy

MHoyeGYiIHRpbWVzdGFtcD0iMTUzMTc1NTcwNCI+NTA8L2tleT48L2ZvcmVpZ24ta2V5cz48cmVm

LXR5cGUgbmFtZT0iSm91cm5hbCBBcnRpY2xlIj4xNzwvcmVmLXR5cGU+PGNvbnRyaWJ1dG9ycz48

YXV0aG9ycz48YXV0aG9yPkhvZiwgQUw8L2F1dGhvcj48YXV0aG9yPkR1eXNlbnMsIEphYWs8L2F1

dGhvcj48L2F1dGhvcnM+PC9jb250cmlidXRvcnM+PHRpdGxlcz48dGl0bGU+UmVzcG9uc2VzIG9m

IGh1bWFuIGFua2xlIG11c2NsZXMgdG8gbWVkaW9sYXRlcmFsIGJhbGFuY2UgcGVydHVyYmF0aW9u

cyBkdXJpbmcgd2Fsa2luZzwvdGl0bGU+PHNlY29uZGFyeS10aXRsZT5IdW1hbiBtb3ZlbWVudCBz

Y2llbmNlPC9zZWNvbmRhcnktdGl0bGU+PC90aXRsZXM+PHBlcmlvZGljYWw+PGZ1bGwtdGl0bGU+

SHVtYW4gbW92ZW1lbnQgc2NpZW5jZTwvZnVsbC10aXRsZT48L3BlcmlvZGljYWw+PHBhZ2VzPjY5

LTgyPC9wYWdlcz48dm9sdW1lPjU3PC92b2x1bWU+PGRhdGVzPjx5ZWFyPjIwMTg8L3llYXI+PC9k

YXRlcz48aXNibj4wMTY3LTk0NTc8L2lzYm4+PHVybHM+PC91cmxzPjwvcmVjb3JkPjwvQ2l0ZT48

L0VuZE5vdGU+

ADDIN EN.CITE PEVuZE5vdGU+PENpdGU+PEF1dGhvcj5CcnVpam48L0F1dGhvcj48WWVhcj4yMDE4PC9ZZWFyPjxS

ZWNOdW0+NDU8L1JlY051bT48RGlzcGxheVRleHQ+WzEwLTEyXTwvRGlzcGxheVRleHQ+PHJlY29y

ZD48cmVjLW51bWJlcj40NTwvcmVjLW51bWJlcj48Zm9yZWlnbi1rZXlzPjxrZXkgYXBwPSJFTiIg

ZGItaWQ9IjV3ZTB6dnRmZGY1c3J0ZXJ0Zmp2YXg1cnZyNXcyZTIwejJ4ZiIgdGltZXN0YW1wPSIx

NTI4ODgzNjg2Ij40NTwva2V5PjwvZm9yZWlnbi1rZXlzPjxyZWYtdHlwZSBuYW1lPSJKb3VybmFs

IEFydGljbGUiPjE3PC9yZWYtdHlwZT48Y29udHJpYnV0b3JzPjxhdXRob3JzPjxhdXRob3I+QnJ1

aWpuLCBTam9lcmQgTTwvYXV0aG9yPjxhdXRob3I+dmFuIERpZcOrbiwgSmFhcCBIPC9hdXRob3I+

PC9hdXRob3JzPjwvY29udHJpYnV0b3JzPjx0aXRsZXM+PHRpdGxlPkNvbnRyb2wgb2YgaHVtYW4g

Z2FpdCBzdGFiaWxpdHkgdGhyb3VnaCBmb290IHBsYWNlbWVudDwvdGl0bGU+PHNlY29uZGFyeS10

aXRsZT5Kb3VybmFsIG9mIFRoZSBSb3lhbCBTb2NpZXR5IEludGVyZmFjZTwvc2Vjb25kYXJ5LXRp

dGxlPjwvdGl0bGVzPjxwZXJpb2RpY2FsPjxmdWxsLXRpdGxlPkpvdXJuYWwgb2YgVGhlIFJveWFs

IFNvY2lldHkgSW50ZXJmYWNlPC9mdWxsLXRpdGxlPjxhYmJyLTE+SiBSIFNvYyBJbnRlcmZhY2U8

L2FiYnItMT48L3BlcmlvZGljYWw+PHBhZ2VzPjIwMTcwODE2PC9wYWdlcz48dm9sdW1lPjE1PC92

b2x1bWU+PG51bWJlcj4xNDM8L251bWJlcj48ZGF0ZXM+PHllYXI+MjAxODwveWVhcj48L2RhdGVz

Pjxpc2JuPjE3NDItNTY4OTwvaXNibj48dXJscz48L3VybHM+PC9yZWNvcmQ+PC9DaXRlPjxDaXRl

PjxBdXRob3I+UmVpbWFubjwvQXV0aG9yPjxZZWFyPjIwMTg8L1llYXI+PFJlY051bT40ODwvUmVj

TnVtPjxyZWNvcmQ+PHJlYy1udW1iZXI+NDg8L3JlYy1udW1iZXI+PGZvcmVpZ24ta2V5cz48a2V5

IGFwcD0iRU4iIGRiLWlkPSI1d2UwenZ0ZmRmNXNydGVydGZqdmF4NXJ2cjV3MmUyMHoyeGYiIHRp

bWVzdGFtcD0iMTUyOTQwNzMxMiI+NDg8L2tleT48L2ZvcmVpZ24ta2V5cz48cmVmLXR5cGUgbmFt

ZT0iSm91cm5hbCBBcnRpY2xlIj4xNzwvcmVmLXR5cGU+PGNvbnRyaWJ1dG9ycz48YXV0aG9ycz48

YXV0aG9yPlJlaW1hbm4sIEhlbmRyaWs8L2F1dGhvcj48YXV0aG9yPkZldHRyb3csIFR5bGVyPC9h

dXRob3I+PGF1dGhvcj5KZWthLCBKb2huIEo8L2F1dGhvcj48L2F1dGhvcnM+PC9jb250cmlidXRv

cnM+PHRpdGxlcz48dGl0bGU+U3RyYXRlZ2llcyBmb3IgdGhlIGNvbnRyb2wgb2YgYmFsYW5jZSBk

dXJpbmcgbG9jb21vdGlvbjwvdGl0bGU+PHNlY29uZGFyeS10aXRsZT5LaW5lc2lvbG9neSBSZXZp

ZXc8L3NlY29uZGFyeS10aXRsZT48L3RpdGxlcz48cGVyaW9kaWNhbD48ZnVsbC10aXRsZT5LaW5l

c2lvbG9neSBSZXZpZXc8L2Z1bGwtdGl0bGU+PC9wZXJpb2RpY2FsPjxwYWdlcz4xOC0yNTwvcGFn

ZXM+PHZvbHVtZT43PC92b2x1bWU+PG51bWJlcj4xPC9udW1iZXI+PGRhdGVzPjx5ZWFyPjIwMTg8

L3llYXI+PC9kYXRlcz48aXNibj4yMTYzLTA0NTM8L2lzYm4+PHVybHM+PC91cmxzPjwvcmVjb3Jk

PjwvQ2l0ZT48Q2l0ZT48QXV0aG9yPkhvZjwvQXV0aG9yPjxZZWFyPjIwMTg8L1llYXI+PFJlY051

bT41MDwvUmVjTnVtPjxyZWNvcmQ+PHJlYy1udW1iZXI+NTA8L3JlYy1udW1iZXI+PGZvcmVpZ24t

a2V5cz48a2V5IGFwcD0iRU4iIGRiLWlkPSI1d2UwenZ0ZmRmNXNydGVydGZqdmF4NXJ2cjV3MmUy

MHoyeGYiIHRpbWVzdGFtcD0iMTUzMTc1NTcwNCI+NTA8L2tleT48L2ZvcmVpZ24ta2V5cz48cmVm

LXR5cGUgbmFtZT0iSm91cm5hbCBBcnRpY2xlIj4xNzwvcmVmLXR5cGU+PGNvbnRyaWJ1dG9ycz48

YXV0aG9ycz48YXV0aG9yPkhvZiwgQUw8L2F1dGhvcj48YXV0aG9yPkR1eXNlbnMsIEphYWs8L2F1

dGhvcj48L2F1dGhvcnM+PC9jb250cmlidXRvcnM+PHRpdGxlcz48dGl0bGU+UmVzcG9uc2VzIG9m

IGh1bWFuIGFua2xlIG11c2NsZXMgdG8gbWVkaW9sYXRlcmFsIGJhbGFuY2UgcGVydHVyYmF0aW9u

cyBkdXJpbmcgd2Fsa2luZzwvdGl0bGU+PHNlY29uZGFyeS10aXRsZT5IdW1hbiBtb3ZlbWVudCBz

Y2llbmNlPC9zZWNvbmRhcnktdGl0bGU+PC90aXRsZXM+PHBlcmlvZGljYWw+PGZ1bGwtdGl0bGU+

SHVtYW4gbW92ZW1lbnQgc2NpZW5jZTwvZnVsbC10aXRsZT48L3BlcmlvZGljYWw+PHBhZ2VzPjY5

LTgyPC9wYWdlcz48dm9sdW1lPjU3PC92b2x1bWU+PGRhdGVzPjx5ZWFyPjIwMTg8L3llYXI+PC9k

YXRlcz48aXNibj4wMTY3LTk0NTc8L2lzYm4+PHVybHM+PC91cmxzPjwvcmVjb3JkPjwvQ2l0ZT48

L0VuZE5vdGU+

ADDIN EN.CITE.DATA [10-12]. References ADDIN EN.REFLIST 1.Wang, Y. and M. Srinivasan, Stepping in the direction of the fall: the next foot placement can be predicted from current upper body state in steady-state walking. Biology letters, 2014. 10(9): p. 20140405.2.Hurt, C.P., et al., Variation in trunk kinematics influences variation in step width during treadmill walking by older and younger adults. Gait & posture, 2010. 31(4): p. 461-464.3.Garby, L. and A. Astrup, The relationship between the respiratory quotient and the energy equivalent of oxygen during simultaneous glucose and lipid oxidation and lipogenesis. Acta Physiologica Scandinavica, 1987. 129(3): p. 443-444.4.Donelan, J.M., et al., Mechanical and metabolic requirements for active lateral stabilization in human walking. Journal of biomechanics, 2004. 37(6): p. 827-835.5.Ortega, J.D., L.A. Fehlman, and C.T. Farley, Effects of aging and arm swing on the metabolic cost of stability in human walking. Journal of biomechanics, 2008. 41(16): p. 3303-3308.6.Arellano, C.J. and R. Kram, The energetic cost of maintaining lateral balance during human running. Journal of Applied Physiology, 2011. 112(3): p. 427-434.7.Dean, J.C., N.B. Alexander, and A.D. Kuo, The effect of lateral stabilization on walking in young and old adults. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, 2007. 54(11): p. 1919-1926.8.Ijmker, T., et al., Energy cost of balance control during walking decreases with external stabilizer stiffness independent of walking speed. Journal of biomechanics, 2013. 46(13): p. 2109-2114.9.IJmker, T., et al., Can external lateral stabilization reduce the energy cost of walking in persons with a lower limb amputation? Gait & posture, 2014. 40(4): p. 616-621.10.Bruijn, S.M. and J.H. van Die?n, Control of human gait stability through foot placement. Journal of The Royal Society Interface, 2018. 15(143): p. 20170816.11.Reimann, H., T. Fettrow, and J.J. Jeka, Strategies for the control of balance during locomotion. Kinesiology Review, 2018. 7(1): p. 18-25.12.Hof, A. and J. Duysens, Responses of human ankle muscles to mediolateral balance perturbations during walking. Human movement science, 2018. 57: p. 69-82. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download