Tweet
I am curious to hear other's experiences with attempting to measure ankle
pronation/supination components (more specifically - frontal and transverse
plane kinematics) during gait using the single segment foot found in VICON's
Plug In Gait model (ie. CGM, Helen Hayes, etc.). Obviously this model has
some limitations in that it is a single segment foot and uses a shared
marker to estimate ankle joint center between foot and shank. However,
while the literature I have read suggests that this type of model will be
less sensitive to changes in inversion/eversion, for example, than a more
complex multi-segment foot, it does seem that even the more simple model
used in Plug In Gait should be able to assess the general travel from
relative inversion toward relative eversion and back toward relative
inversion during stance. Our initial data with some people with seemingly
normal gait while running at 4 m/s have not been as expected for
inversion/eversion (though very reliable and as expected for everything else
including foot IR/ER). I'm trying to determine if it is solely due to a
limitation of the model (and if so, why) or if there is another unknown
issue I'm missing. Thanks for any thoughts/insights.
Cris Stickley, PhD, ATC, CSCS
University of Hawaii, Manoa
pronation/supination components (more specifically - frontal and transverse
plane kinematics) during gait using the single segment foot found in VICON's
Plug In Gait model (ie. CGM, Helen Hayes, etc.). Obviously this model has
some limitations in that it is a single segment foot and uses a shared
marker to estimate ankle joint center between foot and shank. However,
while the literature I have read suggests that this type of model will be
less sensitive to changes in inversion/eversion, for example, than a more
complex multi-segment foot, it does seem that even the more simple model
used in Plug In Gait should be able to assess the general travel from
relative inversion toward relative eversion and back toward relative
inversion during stance. Our initial data with some people with seemingly
normal gait while running at 4 m/s have not been as expected for
inversion/eversion (though very reliable and as expected for everything else
including foot IR/ER). I'm trying to determine if it is solely due to a
limitation of the model (and if so, why) or if there is another unknown
issue I'm missing. Thanks for any thoughts/insights.
Cris Stickley, PhD, ATC, CSCS
University of Hawaii, Manoa