Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Biomedical Engineering / Biomedizinische Technik

Joint Journal of the German Society for Biomedical Engineering in VDE and the Austrian and Swiss Societies for Biomedical Engineering and the German Society of Biomaterials

Editor-in-Chief: Dössel, Olaf

Editorial Board: Augat, Peter / Habibović, Pamela / Haueisen, Jens / Jahnen-Dechent, Wilhelm / Jockenhoevel, Stefan / Knaup-Gregori, Petra / Lenarz, Thomas / Leonhardt, Steffen / Plank, Gernot / Radermacher, Klaus M. / Schkommodau, Erik / Stieglitz, Thomas / Boenick, Ulrich / Jaramaz, Branislav / Kraft, Marc / Lenthe, Harry / Lo, Benny / Mainardi, Luca / Micera, Silvestro / Penzel, Thomas / Robitzki, Andrea A. / Schaeffter, Tobias / Snedeker, Jess G. / Sörnmo, Leif / Sugano, Nobuhiko / Werner, Jürgen /

6 Issues per year


IMPACT FACTOR 2017: 1.096
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 1.492

CiteScore 2017: 0.48

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2017: 0.202
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2017: 0.356

Online
ISSN
1862-278X
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 63, Issue 6

Issues

Volume 57 (2012)

Variations of ankle-foot orthosis-constrained movements increase ankle range of movement while maintaining power output of recumbent cycling

Puteri N.F. Hamdan
  • Faculty of Engineering, Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Nur Azah Hamzaid
  • Corresponding author
  • Faculty of Engineering, Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, Phone: +60379674487, Fax: +60379674579
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Juliana Usman
  • Faculty of Engineering, Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Md. Anamul Islam
  • Faculty of Engineering, Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Victor S.P. Kean
  • Faculty of Engineering, Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Ahmad K. Abdul Wahab
  • Faculty of Engineering, Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Nazirah Hasnan
  • Faculty of Medicine, Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Glen M. Davis
  • Faculty of Engineering, Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
  • Faculty of Health Sciences, Clinical Exercise and Rehabilitation Unit, Discipline of Exercise and Sports Science, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2017-09-15 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/bmt-2017-0004

Abstract

Previous research investigated recumbent cycle power output (PO) from the perspective of knee and hip joint biomechanics. However, ankle-foot biomechanics and, in particular, the effect of ankle-foot orthosis (AFO)-constrained movements on cycle PO has not been widely explored. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine whether AFOs of a fixed position (FP) and in dorsi-plantarflexion (DPF)-, dorsiflexion (DF)- and plantarflexion (PF)-constrained movements might influence PO during voluntary recumbent cycling exercises. Twenty-five healthy individuals participated in this study. All underwent 1-min cycling at a fixed cadence for each of the AFOs. The peak and average PO of each condition were analyzed. The peak and average PO were 27.2±12.0 W (range 6–60) and 17.2±9.0 W (range 2–36), respectively, during voluntary cycling. There were no significant differences in the peak PO generated by the AFOs (p=0.083). There were also no significant differences in the average PO generated using different AFOs (p=0.063). There were no significant differences in the changes of the hip and knee joint angles with different AFOs (p=0.974 and p=1.00, respectively). However, there was a significant difference in the changes of the ankle joint angle (p<0.00). The present study observed that AFO-constrained movements did not have an influence in altering PO during voluntary recumbent cycling in healthy individuals. This finding might serve as a reference for future rehabilitative cycling protocols.

Keywords: ankle-foot orthosis; ankle movement; pedal power output; rehabilitation exercise; voluntary recumbent cycling

References

  • [1]

    Arazpour M, Tajik HR, Aminian G, Bani MA, Ghomshe FT, Hutchins SW. Comparison of the effects of solid versus hinged ankle foot orthoses on select temporal gait parameters in patients with incomplete spinal cord injury during treadmill walking. Prosthet Orthot Int 2012; 37: 70–75.Google Scholar

  • [2]

    Bahramizadeh M, Mousavi ME, Karimlou M, Toole GO. The effect of floor reaction ankle foot orthosis on postural control in children with spastic cerebral palsy. Prosthet Orthot Int 2011; 36: 71–76.Google Scholar

  • [3]

    Bakkum AJT, Groot SD, van der Woude LHV, Janssen TWJ. The effects of hybrid cycle training in inactive people with long-term spinal cord injury: design of a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Disabil Rehabil 2013; 35: 1127–1132.Google Scholar

  • [4]

    Berkelmans R. FES cycling. J Autom Cont 2008; 18: 73–76.Google Scholar

  • [5]

    Duffell LD, Donaldson NDN, Newham DJ. Why is the metabolic efficiency of FES cycling low? IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 2009; 17: 263–269.Google Scholar

  • [6]

    Duffell LD, Donaldson NDN, Newham DJ. Power output during functional electrically stimulated cycling in trained spinal cord injured people. Neuromodulation 2009; 13: 50–57.Google Scholar

  • [7]

    Duffell LD, Donaldson NDN, Perkins TIMA, et al. Long-term intensive electrically stimulated cycling by spinal cord – injured people: effect on muscle properties and their relation to power output. Muscle Nerve 2008; 38: 1304–1311.Google Scholar

  • [8]

    Ferrante S, Saunders B, Duffell L, et al. Quantitative evaluation of stimulation patterns for FES cycling. In: 10th Annual Conference of the International FES Society, Montreal, Canada, July 2005: 2–4.Google Scholar

  • [9]

    Fornusek C, Davis GM, Baek I. Stimulation of shank muscles during functional electrical stimulation cycling increases ankle excursion in individuals with spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2012; 93: 1930–1936.Google Scholar

  • [10]

    Gregor RJ, Broker JP, Ryan MM. The biomechanics of cycling. Exercise Sport Sci R 1991; 19: 127–169.Google Scholar

  • [11]

    Gregor SM, Perell KL, Rushatakankovit S, Miyamoto E, Muffoletto R, Gregor RJ. Lower extremity general muscle moment patterns in healthy individuals during recumbent cycling. Clin Biomech 2002; 17: 123–129.Google Scholar

  • [12]

    Hunt KJ, Hosmann D, Grob M, Saengsuwan J. Metabolic efficiency of volitional and electrically stimulated cycling in able-bodied subjects. Med Eng Phys 2013; 35: 919–925.Google Scholar

  • [13]

    Koch M, Fröhlich M, Emrich E, Urhausen A. The impact of carbon insoles in cycling on performance in the Wingate Anaerobic Test. J Foot Ankle Res 2013; 2: 2–5.Google Scholar

  • [14]

    Martin JC, Brown NAT. Joint-specific power production and fatigue during maximal cycling. J Biomech 2009; 42: 474–479.Google Scholar

  • [15]

    Mccormick CJ, Bonanno DR, Landorf KB. The effect of customised and sham foot orthoses on plantar pressures. J Foot Ankle Res 2013; 6: 19.Google Scholar

  • [16]

    Menotti F, Laudani L, Damiani A, et al. An anterior ankle-foot orthosis improves walking economy in Charcot-Marie-Tooth type 1A patients. Prosthet Orthot Int 2014; 38: 387–392.Google Scholar

  • [17]

    Mulroy SJ, Eberly VJ, Gronely JK, Weiss W, Newsam CJ. Effect of AFO design on walking after stroke: impact of ankle plantar flexion contracture. Prosthet Orthot Int 2010; 34: 277–292.Google Scholar

  • [18]

    Pierson-Carey CD, Brown DA, Dairaghi CA. Changes in resultant pedal reaction forces due to ankle immobilization during pedaling. J Appl Biomech 1997; 13: 334–346.Google Scholar

  • [19]

    Ragnarsson KT, Pollack S, O’Daniel W, Edgar R, Petrofsky J, Nash MS. Clinical evaluation of computerized functional electrical stimulation after spinal cord injury: a multicenter pilot study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1988; 69: 672–677.Google Scholar

  • [20]

    Redmond AC, Landorf KB, Keenan A. Contoured, prefabricated foot orthoses demonstrate comparable mechanical properties to contoured, customised foot orthoses: a plantar pressure study. J Foot Ankle Res 2009; 2: 20.Google Scholar

  • [21]

    Schutte LM, Rodgers MM, Zajac FE, Glaser RM. Improving the efficacy of electrical stimulation-induced leg cycle ergometry: an analysis based on a dynamic musculoskeletal model. IEEE T Rehabil Eng 1993; 1: 109–125.Google Scholar

  • [22]

    Sinclair PJ, Davis GM, Smith RM, Cheam BS, Sutton JR. Pedal forces produced during neuromuscular electrical stimulation cycling in paraplegics. Clin Biomech 1996; 11: 51–57.Google Scholar

  • [23]

    Szecsi J, Krewer C, Müller F, Straube A. Functional electrical stimulation assisted cycling of patients with subacute stroke: kinetic and kinematic analysis. Clin Biomech 2008; 23: 1086–1094.Google Scholar

  • [24]

    Szecsi J, Schlick C, Schiller M, Pöllmann W, Koenig N, Straube A. Functional electrical stimulation-assisted cycling of patients with multiple sclerosis: biomechanical and functional outcome – a pilot study. J Rehabil Med 2009; 41: 674–680.Google Scholar

  • [25]

    Szecsi J, Straube A, Fornusek C. A biomechanical cause of low power production during FES cycling of subjects with SCI. J Neuroeng Rehabil 2014; 11: 123.Google Scholar

  • [26]

    Szecsi J, Straube A, Fornusek C. Leg general muscle moment and power patterns in able-bodied subjects during recumbent cycle ergometry with ankle immobilization. Med Eng Phys 2014; 36: 1421–1427.Google Scholar

  • [27]

    Trumbower RD, Faghri PD. Improving pedal power during semireclined leg cycling. IEEE Eng Med Biol Mag 2004; 23: 62–71.Google Scholar

  • [28]

    Trumbower RD, Faghri PD. Kinematic analyses of semireclined leg cycling in able-bodied and spinal cord injured individuals. Spinal Cord 2005; 43: 543–549.Google Scholar

  • [29]

    Trumbower RD, Rajasekaran S. Identifying offline muscle strength profiles sufficient for short-duration FES-LCE exercise: a pac learning model. J Clin MonitorComp 2006; 20: 209–220.Google Scholar

  • [30]

    Van Soest AJ, Gföhler M, Casius LJR. Consequences of ankle joint fixation on FES cycling power output: a simulation study. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2005; 37: 797–806.Google Scholar

  • [31]

    Yeo BK, Bonanno DR. The effect of foot orthoses and in-shoe wedges during cycling: a systematic review. J Foot Ankle Res 2014; 7: 31.Google Scholar

  • [32]

    Yoshihuku Y, Herzog W. Maximal muscle power output in cycling: a modelling approach. J Sports Sci 1996; 14: 139–157.Google Scholar

About the article

Received: 2017-01-09

Accepted: 2017-07-24

Published Online: 2017-09-15

Published in Print: 2018-11-27


Citation Information: Biomedical Engineering / Biomedizinische Technik, Volume 63, Issue 6, Pages 691–697, ISSN (Online) 1862-278X, ISSN (Print) 0013-5585, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/bmt-2017-0004.

Export Citation

©2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.Get Permission

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in