Sprinting with prosthetic versus biological legs: insight from experimental data
Running-prostheses have enabled exceptional athletes with bilateral leg amputations to surpass Olympic 400 m athletics qualifying standards. Due to the world-class performances and relatively fast race finishes of these athletes, many people assume that running-prostheses provide users an unfair adv...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
The Royal Society
2022-01-01
|
| Series: | Royal Society Open Science |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.211799 |
| _version_ | 1818974214309281792 |
|---|---|
| author | Owen N. Beck Paolo Taboga Alena M. Grabowski |
| author_facet | Owen N. Beck Paolo Taboga Alena M. Grabowski |
| author_sort | Owen N. Beck |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Running-prostheses have enabled exceptional athletes with bilateral leg amputations to surpass Olympic 400 m athletics qualifying standards. Due to the world-class performances and relatively fast race finishes of these athletes, many people assume that running-prostheses provide users an unfair advantage over biologically legged competitors during long sprint races. These assumptions have led athletics governing bodies to prohibit the use of running-prostheses in sanctioned non-amputee (NA) competitions, such as at the Olympics. However, here we show that no athlete with bilateral leg amputations using running-prostheses, including the fastest such athlete, exhibits a single 400 m running performance metric that is better than those achieved by NA athletes. Specifically, the best experimentally measured maximum running velocity and sprint endurance profile of athletes with prosthetic legs are similar to, but not better than those of NA athletes. Further, the best experimentally measured initial race acceleration (from 0 to 20 m), maximum velocity around curves, and velocity at aerobic capacity of athletes with prosthetic legs were 40%, 1–3% and 19% slower compared to NA athletes, respectively. Therefore, based on these 400 m performance metrics, use of prosthetic legs during 400 m running races is not unequivocally advantageous compared to the use of biological legs. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-20T15:36:30Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-82a4248a350440d6ac6af7521b233d4e |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2054-5703 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-20T15:36:30Z |
| publishDate | 2022-01-01 |
| publisher | The Royal Society |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Royal Society Open Science |
| spelling | doaj.art-82a4248a350440d6ac6af7521b233d4e2022-12-21T19:35:24ZengThe Royal SocietyRoyal Society Open Science2054-57032022-01-019110.1098/rsos.211799Sprinting with prosthetic versus biological legs: insight from experimental dataOwen N. Beck0Paolo Taboga1Alena M. Grabowski2The Wallace H. Coulter Department of Biomedical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology and Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USADepartment of Kinesiology, California State University, Sacramento, CA, USADepartment of Integrative Physiology, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, USARunning-prostheses have enabled exceptional athletes with bilateral leg amputations to surpass Olympic 400 m athletics qualifying standards. Due to the world-class performances and relatively fast race finishes of these athletes, many people assume that running-prostheses provide users an unfair advantage over biologically legged competitors during long sprint races. These assumptions have led athletics governing bodies to prohibit the use of running-prostheses in sanctioned non-amputee (NA) competitions, such as at the Olympics. However, here we show that no athlete with bilateral leg amputations using running-prostheses, including the fastest such athlete, exhibits a single 400 m running performance metric that is better than those achieved by NA athletes. Specifically, the best experimentally measured maximum running velocity and sprint endurance profile of athletes with prosthetic legs are similar to, but not better than those of NA athletes. Further, the best experimentally measured initial race acceleration (from 0 to 20 m), maximum velocity around curves, and velocity at aerobic capacity of athletes with prosthetic legs were 40%, 1–3% and 19% slower compared to NA athletes, respectively. Therefore, based on these 400 m performance metrics, use of prosthetic legs during 400 m running races is not unequivocally advantageous compared to the use of biological legs.https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.211799runningamputeeathleticstrackprostheses400 m |
| spellingShingle | Owen N. Beck Paolo Taboga Alena M. Grabowski Sprinting with prosthetic versus biological legs: insight from experimental data Royal Society Open Science running amputee athletics track prostheses 400 m |
| title | Sprinting with prosthetic versus biological legs: insight from experimental data |
| title_full | Sprinting with prosthetic versus biological legs: insight from experimental data |
| title_fullStr | Sprinting with prosthetic versus biological legs: insight from experimental data |
| title_full_unstemmed | Sprinting with prosthetic versus biological legs: insight from experimental data |
| title_short | Sprinting with prosthetic versus biological legs: insight from experimental data |
| title_sort | sprinting with prosthetic versus biological legs insight from experimental data |
| topic | running amputee athletics track prostheses 400 m |
| url | https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.211799 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT owennbeck sprintingwithprostheticversusbiologicallegsinsightfromexperimentaldata AT paolotaboga sprintingwithprostheticversusbiologicallegsinsightfromexperimentaldata AT alenamgrabowski sprintingwithprostheticversusbiologicallegsinsightfromexperimentaldata |