Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Two biomechanical mechanisms for the development of Achilles tendinopathy in runners have been proposed: A whipping mechanism characterized by prolonged and excessive rearfoot eversion, and a tearing mechanism characterized by high eccentric plantar flexor forces. The purpose of this pilot study was to determine if runners with and without a history of Achilles tendinopathy exhibited gait biomechanics consistent with either of these mechanisms.
METHODS: Seven male runners with previous or current Achilles tendinopathy and seven healthy male control runners were evaluated by three-dimensional gait analysis. Peak rearfoot eversion angle, rearfoot eversion excursion, duration of rearfoot eversion, and peak rearfoot inversion angle were compared between groups to evaluate the whipping mechanism of injury. Peak dorsiflexion angle, peak dorsiflexion velocity, and peak ankle power absorption were compared between groups to evaluate the tearing mechanism. Additionally, rearfoot eversion angle and sagittal plane ankle power waveforms were compared between groups using statistical parametric mapping.
RESULTS: There were no differences in any rearfoot eversion, inversion, or dorsiflexion variables or waveforms during running in the Achilles tendinopathy group compared to controls.
CONCLUSIONS: Rearfoot strike runners with Achilles tendinopathy do not exhibit running biomechanics consistent with either the whipping or tearing mechanisms of injury.
METHODS: Seven male runners with previous or current Achilles tendinopathy and seven healthy male control runners were evaluated by three-dimensional gait analysis. Peak rearfoot eversion angle, rearfoot eversion excursion, duration of rearfoot eversion, and peak rearfoot inversion angle were compared between groups to evaluate the whipping mechanism of injury. Peak dorsiflexion angle, peak dorsiflexion velocity, and peak ankle power absorption were compared between groups to evaluate the tearing mechanism. Additionally, rearfoot eversion angle and sagittal plane ankle power waveforms were compared between groups using statistical parametric mapping.
RESULTS: There were no differences in any rearfoot eversion, inversion, or dorsiflexion variables or waveforms during running in the Achilles tendinopathy group compared to controls.
CONCLUSIONS: Rearfoot strike runners with Achilles tendinopathy do not exhibit running biomechanics consistent with either the whipping or tearing mechanisms of injury.
摘要：
背景：已经提出了两种在跑步者中发展跟腱病的生物力学机制：一种鞭打机制，其特征是长时间和过度的后足外翻，和以高偏心足底屈力为特征的撕裂机制。这项初步研究的目的是确定有无跟腱病史的跑步者是否表现出与这些机制一致的步态生物力学。
方法：通过三维步态分析评估了7名先前或当前患有跟腱病的男性跑步者和7名健康男性对照跑步者。后足外翻角峰值,后脚外翻短途旅行,后足外翻的持续时间，比较两组的后足翻转角峰值，以评估损伤的鞭打机制。峰值背屈角度,峰值背屈速度,比较各组踝关节功率吸收峰值，以评估撕裂机制。此外,使用统计参数映射比较两组之间的后足外翻角度和矢状面踝关节功率波形。
结果：任何后足外翻都没有差异，倒置,与对照组相比，跟腱病组在跑步过程中的背屈变量或波形。
结论：跟腱病后足打击运动员的跑步生物力学与鞭打或撕裂损伤机制均不一致。
方法：通过三维步态分析评估了7名先前或当前患有跟腱病的男性跑步者和7名健康男性对照跑步者。后足外翻角峰值,后脚外翻短途旅行,后足外翻的持续时间，比较两组的后足翻转角峰值，以评估损伤的鞭打机制。峰值背屈角度,峰值背屈速度,比较各组踝关节功率吸收峰值，以评估撕裂机制。此外,使用统计参数映射比较两组之间的后足外翻角度和矢状面踝关节功率波形。
结果：任何后足外翻都没有差异，倒置,与对照组相比，跟腱病组在跑步过程中的背屈变量或波形。
结论：跟腱病后足打击运动员的跑步生物力学与鞭打或撕裂损伤机制均不一致。
