Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
, 26 (4), 407-14

Comparison of Lower Extremity Kinematic Curves During Overground and Treadmill Running

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Comparison of Lower Extremity Kinematic Curves During Overground and Treadmill Running

Rebecca E Fellin et al. J Appl Biomech.

Abstract

Researchers conduct gait analyses utilizing both overground and treadmill modes of running. Previous studies comparing these modes analyzed discrete variables. Recently, techniques involving quantitative pattern analysis have assessed kinematic curve similarity in gait. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare hip, knee and rearfoot 3-D kinematics between overground and treadmill running using quantitative kinematic curve analysis. Twenty runners ran at 3.35 m/s ± 5% during treadmill and overground conditions while right lower extremity kinematics were recorded. Kinematics of the hip, knee and rearfoot at footstrike and peak were compared using intraclass correlation coefficients. Kinematic curves during stance phase were compared using the trend symmetry method within each subject. The overall average trend symmetry was high, 0.94 (1.0 is perfect symmetry) between running modes. The transverse plane and knee frontal plane exhibited lower similarity (0.86-0.90). Other than a 4.5 degree reduction in rearfoot dorsiflexion at footstrike during treadmill running, all differences were ≤1.5 degrees. 17/18 discrete variables exhibited modest correlations (>0.6) and 8/18 exhibited strong correlations (>0.8). In conclusion, overground and treadmill running kinematic curves were generally similar when averaged across subjects. Although some subjects exhibited differences in transverse plane curves, overall, treadmill running was representative of overground running for most subjects.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Comparison of hip kinematics between overground, OG (dashed) and treadmill, TM, (solid) running averaged across all subjects. Shaded region denotes the between subjects standard deviation for OG running. Statistical analysis was conducted within subjects. Note the similarities in sagittal and frontal plane motions.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Comparison of knee kinematics between overground, OG, (dashed) and treadmill, TM, (solid) running averaged across all subjects. Shaded region denotes the between subjects standard deviation for OG running. Statistical analysis was conducted within subjects. Note the similarity in the flexion curves contrasted with the larger differences, still less than 2°, in the other planes.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Comparison of rearfoot kinematics between overground, OG, (dashed) and treadmill, TM, (solid) running averaged across all subjects. Shaded region denotes the between subjects standard deviation for OG running. Statistical analysis was conducted within subjects. Note that subjects land in a less dorsiflexed and more abducted position during TM running compared with OG running although the rearfoot kinematic curves are similar throughout most of stance.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 15 PubMed Central articles

See all "Cited by" articles

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources

Feedback