Determination of joint moments with instrumented force shoes in a variety of tasks

• Published in: Journal of biomechanics Vol. 43; no. 14; pp. 2848 - 2854
• Main Authors: Faber, Gert S., Kingma, Idsart, Martin Schepers, H., Veltink, Peter H., van Dieën, Jaap H.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Kidlington Elsevier Ltd 19.10.2010; Elsevier; Elsevier Limited
• Subjects: Ambulatory measurement; Ankle and spine moments; Biological and medical sciences; Biomechanical Phenomena; Biomechanics; Dynamical systems; Ergonomics. Workplace layout; Ergonomics. Workplace layout. Occupational psychology; Ground reaction force; Grounds; Hoisting; Humans; Instrumented force shoes; Inverse dynamics; Joints - physiology; Male; Medical sciences; Movement - physiology; Occupational biomechanics; Occupational medicine; Optoelectronics; Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation; Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine; Pushing; Shoes; Stress, Mechanical; Tasks; Walking; Walking - physiology; Weight-Bearing - physiology; Ankle and spine moments; Instrumented force shoes; Occupational biomechanics; Ground reaction force; Ambulatory measurement; Spine; Shoe; Osteoarticular system; Biomechanics; Ankle; Ankle joint; Ergonomics; Moment; Ambulatory; Occupational medicine; Biomedical engineering
• ISSN: 0021-9290; 1873-2380; 1873-2380
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2010.06.005

Ground reaction forces (GRFs) are often used in inverse dynamics analyses to determine joint loading. These GRFs are usually measured using force plates (FPs). As an alternative, instrumented force shoes (FSs) can be used, which have the advantage over FPs that they do not constrain foot placement. This study tested the FS system in one normal weight subject (77kg) performing 19 different lifting, pushing and pulling and walking tasks. Kinematics were measured with an optoelectronic system and the GRFs and the positions of the centre of pressure (CoP) were synchronously measured with FPs and FSs. Differences between the outcomes of the two measurement systems (i.e. CoP and GRFs) and the resulting ankle and L5/S1 joint moments were determined at the instant of the peak GRF (DaPF). For most lifting and pushing and pulling tasks, the difference between the FP and FS measurements remained small: GRF DaPF remained below 3% body weight, CoP DaPF remained below 10mm, ankle moment DaPF remained below 7% of the peak total ankle moment that occurred during normal walking and L5/S1 moment DaPF remained below 7% of the peak total L5/S1 moment that occurred during normal symmetric lifting. More substantial differences were only found in the maximal pushing tasks. For the walking tasks, peak vertical GRFs were somewhat underestimated. However, differences in ankle and L5/S1 moments remained small, i.e. DaPF below 7% of the peak total moment that occurred during normal walking.