Walking in a controlled ankle motion (CAM) boot: In-boot measurement of joint kinematics and kinetics

• Published in: Journal of biomechanics Vol. 176; p. 112327
• Main Authors: Stolycia, Mason L., Lunn, David E., Wilkins, Richard A., Barnett, Cleveland T., Walker, Josh
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Elsevier Ltd 01.11.2024; Elsevier Limited
• Subjects: Achilles tendon; Ankle; Boots; Data collection; Foot and ankle orthoses; Footwear; Gait; Hip; Joints (anatomy); Kinematic marker placement; Kinematics; Kinetics; Motion capture; Orthotic device; Rehabilitation; Shoes & boots; Structure-function relationships; Walking; United States > US; Sweden; Foot and ankle orthoses; Kinematic marker placement; Achilles tendon; Rehabilitation; Gait; Orthotic device
• ISSN: 0021-9290; 1873-2380; 1873-2380
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2024.112327

Research investigating ankle function during walking in a controlled ankle motion (CAM) boot has either placed markers on the outside of the boot or made major alterations to the structure of the CAM boot to uncover key landmarks. The aim of this study was to quantify joint kinematics and kinetics using “in-boot” skin markers whilst making only minimal structural alterations. Seventeen healthy participants walked at their preferred walking speed in two conditions: (1) in standard athletic trainers (ASICS patriot 8, ASICS Oceania Pty Ltd, USA), and (2) using a hard-cased CAM boot (Rebound® Air Walker, Össur, Iceland) fitted on the right foot. Kinematic measurements revealed that CAM boots restrict sagittal plane ankle range of motion to less than 5°, and to ∼3° in the frontal plane, which is a reduction of 85% and 73% compared to standard footwear, respectively (p < 0.001). This ankle restriction resulted in a reduction of ankle joint total limb work contribution from 38 ± 5% in normal footwear to 13 ± 4% in the CAM boot (p < 0.001). This study suggests that CAM boots do restrict the ankle joint’s ability to effectively perform work during walking, which leads to compensatory mechanisms at the ipsilateral and contralateral hip and knee joints. Our findings align with previous research that employed “on-boot” kinematic measurements, so we conclude that in-boot approaches do not offer any benefit to the researcher and instead, on-boot measurements are suitable.