Abstract：
Although the effects of footwear type on joint stiffness have previously been investigated, researchers did not consider foot flexibility. Thus, the present investigation aimed to determine the interaction effects of footwear type, static navicular drop and dynamic ankle pronation on dynamic joint stiffness in running.
Does the footwear types in interaction with the foot posture affect the stiffness of the joints of the lower limb?
Forty-seven male individuals participated in this study. Firstly, they were divided into the high navicular, low navicular, and normal navicular drop. Secondly, they were divided into the high dynamic ankle pronation, low dynamic ankle pronation, and normal dynamic ankle pronation groups. Participants performed three running trials at 3 ± 0.2 m/s at minimalist footwear, conventional footwear, and barefoot conditions. We collected the ground reaction forces and three-dimensional kinematic data and calculated joint stiffness over the stance phase.
There was no significant main effect of navicular drop or dynamic ankle pronation on dynamic joint stiffness for the ankle, knee, and hip (p > 0.05). However, footwear type significantly affected dynamic joint stiffness. The pairwise comparison revealed that the ankle and hip dynamic joint stiffness magnitudes in the conventional footwear condition were greater than in the barefoot and minimalist footwear conditions (p 0.001). In contrast, the knee dynamic joint stiffness magnitude in the conventional footwear condition was lesser than in barefoot and minimalist footwear conditions (p 0.001).
The navicular drop or dynamic ankle pronation did not influence lower limb joint stiffness, and there was no significant interaction between navicular drop or dynamic ankle pronation and footwear on lower limb dynamic joint stiffness. However, conventional footwear increased the ankle and hip dynamic joint stiffness while reducing knee dynamic joint stiffness, leading to changes in transfer energy, which could have implications for relative injury risk.
Does the footwear types in interaction with the foot posture affect the stiffness of the joints of the lower limb?
Forty-seven male individuals participated in this study. Firstly, they were divided into the high navicular, low navicular, and normal navicular drop. Secondly, they were divided into the high dynamic ankle pronation, low dynamic ankle pronation, and normal dynamic ankle pronation groups. Participants performed three running trials at 3 ± 0.2 m/s at minimalist footwear, conventional footwear, and barefoot conditions. We collected the ground reaction forces and three-dimensional kinematic data and calculated joint stiffness over the stance phase.
There was no significant main effect of navicular drop or dynamic ankle pronation on dynamic joint stiffness for the ankle, knee, and hip (p > 0.05). However, footwear type significantly affected dynamic joint stiffness. The pairwise comparison revealed that the ankle and hip dynamic joint stiffness magnitudes in the conventional footwear condition were greater than in the barefoot and minimalist footwear conditions (p 0.001). In contrast, the knee dynamic joint stiffness magnitude in the conventional footwear condition was lesser than in barefoot and minimalist footwear conditions (p 0.001).
The navicular drop or dynamic ankle pronation did not influence lower limb joint stiffness, and there was no significant interaction between navicular drop or dynamic ankle pronation and footwear on lower limb dynamic joint stiffness. However, conventional footwear increased the ankle and hip dynamic joint stiffness while reducing knee dynamic joint stiffness, leading to changes in transfer energy, which could have implications for relative injury risk.
摘要：
背景：尽管以前已经研究了鞋类类型对关节刚度的影响，研究人员没有考虑脚的灵活性。因此，本调查旨在确定鞋类类型的相互作用效应，静态舟骨跌落和动态踝关节内旋对跑步中动态关节刚度的影响。
目的：与脚部姿势相互作用的鞋类类型是否会影响下肢关节的刚度？
方法：47名男性参加了这项研究。首先,他们被分成了高舟骨，低舟骨，和正常的舟骨滴。其次,它们分为高动态踝关节内旋，低动态踝关节内旋,和正常动态踝关节内旋组。参与者在极简主义鞋类中以3±0.2m/s的速度进行了三次跑步试验，传统的鞋类，赤脚的条件。我们收集了地面反作用力和三维运动学数据，并计算了站立阶段的关节刚度。
结果：舟状跌落或动态踝关节内旋对踝关节的动态刚度没有显着的主要影响，膝盖,和臀部（p>0.05）。然而,鞋类类型显著影响动态关节刚度。成对比较显示，传统鞋类条件下的踝关节和髋关节动态刚度幅度大于赤脚和极简主义鞋类条件下的踝关节和髋关节动态刚度幅度（p0.001）。相比之下,传统鞋类条件下的膝关节动态关节刚度幅度小于赤足和极简主义鞋类条件下的膝关节动态关节刚度幅度(p<0.001).
结论：舟骨下垂或动态踝关节内旋不影响下肢关节僵硬，舟骨下垂或动态踝关节内旋与鞋类对下肢动态关节刚度无明显交互作用。然而,传统的鞋类增加了踝关节和髋关节的动态刚度，同时降低了膝关节的动态关节刚度，导致传递能量的变化，这可能对相对伤害风险有影响。
目的：与脚部姿势相互作用的鞋类类型是否会影响下肢关节的刚度？
方法：47名男性参加了这项研究。首先,他们被分成了高舟骨，低舟骨，和正常的舟骨滴。其次,它们分为高动态踝关节内旋，低动态踝关节内旋,和正常动态踝关节内旋组。参与者在极简主义鞋类中以3±0.2m/s的速度进行了三次跑步试验，传统的鞋类，赤脚的条件。我们收集了地面反作用力和三维运动学数据，并计算了站立阶段的关节刚度。
结果：舟状跌落或动态踝关节内旋对踝关节的动态刚度没有显着的主要影响，膝盖,和臀部（p>0.05）。然而,鞋类类型显著影响动态关节刚度。成对比较显示，传统鞋类条件下的踝关节和髋关节动态刚度幅度大于赤脚和极简主义鞋类条件下的踝关节和髋关节动态刚度幅度（p0.001）。相比之下,传统鞋类条件下的膝关节动态关节刚度幅度小于赤足和极简主义鞋类条件下的膝关节动态关节刚度幅度(p<0.001).
结论：舟骨下垂或动态踝关节内旋不影响下肢关节僵硬，舟骨下垂或动态踝关节内旋与鞋类对下肢动态关节刚度无明显交互作用。然而,传统的鞋类增加了踝关节和髋关节的动态刚度，同时降低了膝关节的动态关节刚度，导致传递能量的变化，这可能对相对伤害风险有影响。
