Elsevier

Gait & Posture

Volume 62, May 2018, Pages 111-116
Gait & Posture

Full length article
Partitioning ground reaction forces for multi-segment foot joint kinetics

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2018.03.001Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Multi-segment foot model kinetics are possible using a single force platform.

  • The two partitioning methods may both be applicable at the midtarsal joint.

  • Both partitioning methods have some limitations at the metatarsophalangeal joint.

Abstract

Background

Kinematic multi-segment foot models have been increasingly used to study foot function. The addition of kinetics to these models may enhance their utility; however, this been hindered by limitations in measuring ground reaction forces (GRFs) under individual foot segments.

Purpose

To determine the accuracy of partitioning segment GRFs from a single force platform on foot joint kinetics.

Methods

Two potential partitioning methods were applied to a previously published three-segment kinetic foot model. The first method calculated joint kinetics only when the center of pressure crossed anterior to a joint (CPcross). The second method utilized a virtual pressure mat and a proportionality assumption to partition GRFs from the force platform (PRESS). Accuracy was assessed by comparing joint moments and powers obtained from each partitioning method to those obtained from a dual force plate approach that isolated forces under two segments at a time (2Plate). Thirteen healthy pediatric subjects walked in a controlled manner so as to isolate the kinetics acting at the metatarsophalangeal (MTP) joint and, subsequently, the midtarsal joint.

Results

The PRESS method was generally more accurate than the CPcross method, and both methods were more accurate at the midtarsal joint than at the MTP joint. At the MTP joint, sagittal plane moment peaks, power peaks, and work done were slightly overestimated, more so by CPcross than PRESS. At the midtarsal joint, sagittal plane moments were captured well by PRESS, while CPcross missed the early portion of the moment, but both methods captured power profiles fairly accurately.

Significance

Analysis of kinetics in multi-segment foot models may provide insight into foot function, pathologies, and interventions. Partitioning accuracy and generalizability is promising for analysis of the midtarsal joints but has limitations at the MTP joint.

Introduction

In clinical gait analysis and human movement research, traditional single segment foot models are increasingly being replaced by models that subdivide the foot into several segments (e.g. [[1], [2], [3], [4]]). To date, these multi-segment foot (MSF) models have primarily been confined to the analysis of joint angles. Expanding these kinematic-only models to also allow for kinetics analysis may provide additional insights into foot function [[5], [6], [7], [8], [9]], but requires several additional parameters. In addition to segment orientations, inverse dynamics based kinetics calculations also rely on identification of joint centers of rotation, estimation of segment inertial properties, and measurements of ground reaction forces (GRFs) under each segment. Of these, measuring segment GRFs is perhaps the most difficult hurdle from a technological standpoint, as commercial devices capable of measuring both segment vertical and shear forces are not yet commonplace [10], and the use of multiple adjacent force plates [[5], [11], [12]] requires targeted walking which may not be clinically feasible.

A method that can accurately partition the GRFs from a single force plate is attractive because it would allow MSF joint kinetics to be calculated from commonly employed equipment already found in gait and movement analysis clinics and laboratories. Two potential methods of GRF partitioning have been developed previously. The first method quantifies joint kinetics from a single force plate only when the location of the center-of-pressure (CoP) passes anterior to the joint, i.e. the entire GRF is applied to adjacent segments sequentially. This technique has only been used to examine kinetics of the metatarsophalangeal joints [[13], [14], [15]], but could theoretically also be applied to other joints in the foot, such as the midtarsal joint. The second method employs an additional pressure mat secured to the top of the force plate. The segment vertical forces from the pressure mat are then used to help partition the shear forces from the force plate using an assumption of proportionality [[7], [16]]. The accuracy of this latter method on segment GRFs alone has been evaluated [[9], [17], [18]], but neither method has been validated in terms of application to inverse dynamics based MSF joint kinetics.

The purpose of the present study was to assess the accuracy of potential GRF partitioning methods on the calculation of MSF joint kinetics (i.e. moments, powers, and work), using a previously published kinetic multi-segment foot model [[5], [19]]. This was accomplished by comparing estimates obtained from the partitioning methods to those from a multiple force plate approach that isolated forces under two segments at a time. By studying the potential errors inherent in these methods, we hope to better understand their validity and applicability. The ability to calculate foot joint kinetics from a single force platform would provide researchers and clinicians with a new tool with which to study foot muscle function, better understand foot pathologies, and evaluate potential treatment interventions.

Section snippets

Participants

We re-analyzed data that were previously collected [[5], [17], [19]], consisting of 13 healthy pediatric participants(9 M/4F; age 13.1 ± 3.1; height 156 ± 18 cm, weight 51 ± 18 kg). Four of the original 17 subjects were excluded due to concerns over foot placement accuracy. All participants were volunteers and signed consent forms approved by the local Institutional Review Board.

Protocol

The employed marker set, associated multi-segment foot model, and collection protocol have all been previously

MTP joint moments (Fig. 2)

In the sagittal plane, the CPcross method resulted in a substantial delay in the onset of the MTP extension moment, thereby missing a large portion of the early signal. The onset of GRF under the hallux segment varied substantially among subjects, occurring on average at 18% of stance (Table 1). The CoP, on the other hand, did not pass the MTP joint until 71% of stance. At this point, the extension moment increased rapidly, then overshot the 2Plate peak by 17% (CPcross: 0.145 ± 0.032 Nm/kg;

Discussion

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of two different single-plate GRF partitioning methods on MSF joint kinetics. Overall, the results show that the PRESS method was generally more accurate than the CPcross method, and both methods were more accurate at the midtarsal joint than at the MTP joint. Each method may have utility when applied to specific joints, planes, and conditions, provided the potential errors are well understood. Discussion below focuses on understanding the

Conflicts of interest

No conflicts of interest to report.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by funding from the Center for Research in Human Movement Variability of the University of Nebraska at Omaha and the National Institute of Health (P20GM109090) to KZT.

Cited by (25)

  • Examining the intrinsic foot muscles’ capacity to modulate plantar flexor gearing and ankle joint contributions to propulsion in vertical jumping

    2023, Journal of Sport and Health Science
    Citation Excerpt :

    MTPj start was the time-point at which the MTPj moment crossed zero to become an internal plantar flexion moment, which is synonymous with the ground reaction force shifting anteriorly to the joint's rotational axis. This step is necessary to ensure the moment attributed to the joint is valid based on the limitations of inverse dynamic calculations within the foot segments.25,26 Ankle joint gear ratio was calculated as the ratio of the lengths of the external moment arm and the internal moment arm over the propulsive phase.

  • Anti-pronator components are essential to effectively alter lower-limb kinematics and kinetics in individuals with flexible flatfeet

    2021, Clinical Biomechanics
    Citation Excerpt :

    The mass of the foot was arbitrary divided by three and distributed over the rearfoot, midfoot and forefoot segments. At each frame, GRF was applied to one foot segment according to the anterior-posterior location of the center of pressure (Bruening and Takahashi, 2018). Joint moments were normalized to body mass (Nm/kg).

  • Does increased midsole bending stiffness of sport shoes redistribute lower limb joint work during running?

    2019, Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport
    Citation Excerpt :

    Instead, the moment around the MTP joint generated by the GRF was set to zero until the COP progressed distally to the MTP joint axis.1,10,18 This approach has been shown to overestimate the peak MTP joint plantarflexion moment by up to 17% while underestimating total angular impulse by up to 31%.22 This method, however, has only been shown to affect the negative but not the positive MTP joint power.

View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text