A Novel Method for Field Measurement of Ankle Joint Stiffness in Hopping

Stiffness of ankle joint has been investigated in a wide range of biomechanical studies with a focus on the improvement of performance and reduction in the risk of injury. However, measuring ankle joint stiffness (AJS) using the existing conventional methodologies requires sophisticated equipment su...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Sanubar Ghorbani Faal, Elham Shirzad, Ali Sharifnezhad, Mojtaba Ashrostaghi, Roozbeh Naemi
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2021-12-01
Series:Applied Sciences
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/11/24/12140
Description
Summary:Stiffness of ankle joint has been investigated in a wide range of biomechanical studies with a focus on the improvement of performance and reduction in the risk of injury. However, measuring ankle joint stiffness (AJS) using the existing conventional methodologies requires sophisticated equipment such as force plate and motion analyses systems. This study presents a novel method for measuring AJS during a hopping task with no force or motion measurement system. Also the validity of the proposed new method was investigated by comparing the results against those obtained using conventional method in which motion capture and force plate data are used. Twelve participants performed the controlled hopping task at 2.2 Hz, on a force platform, and six high speed cameras recorded the movement. To calculate the AJS in both methods, the lower extremity was modeled as a three linked rigid segments robot with three joints. In the new method, the contact time and flight time were used to calculate ground reaction force, and inverse kinematic and inverse dynamic approaches were used to calculate the ankle kinematic and kinetic. The AJS calculated using the new method was compared against the results of conventional method as the reference. The calculated AJS using this new method (506.47 ± 177.84 N·m/rad) showed a significant correlation (r = 0.752) with the AJS calculated using conventional method (642.39 ± 185.96 N·m/rad). The validation test showed a mean difference of −24.76% using Bland–Altman plot. The presented method can be used as a valid, and low-cost tool for assessing AJS in the field in low resource settings.
ISSN:2076-3417