Differences in Muscle Activities and Kinematics between Forefoot Strike and Rearfoot Strike in the Lower Limb during 180° Turns
# Background A forefoot strike (FFS) could be a safer landing technique than a rearfoot strike (RFS) during a cutting motion to prevent anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury. # Purpose This study aimed to determine the joint angles, ground reaction force (GRF), and muscle activity levels asso...
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN |
| Publicado: |
North American Sports Medicine Institute
2021
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/0619fad901584643810c5f7b1d0272f9 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: | # Background
A forefoot strike (FFS) could be a safer landing technique than a rearfoot strike (RFS) during a cutting motion to prevent anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury.
# Purpose
This study aimed to determine the joint angles, ground reaction force (GRF), and muscle activity levels associated with FFS and RFS landings during 180° turns.
# Study design
Cross-sectional study
# Methods
Fourteen male soccer players from the University of Tsukuba football (soccer) club participated in this study. The FFS consisted of initial contact with the toes on the force plates followed by the rearfoot; meanwhile, the initial contact was performed with the heels on the force plates followed by the forefoot for the RFS. Ankle, knee, and hip joint angles were recorded using a three-dimensional motion capture system. GRFs were measured using a force plate. Gluteus medius (GM), rectus femoris (RF), vastus medialis (VM), vastus lateralis (VL), semitendinosus (ST), biceps femoris (BF), tibialis anterior (TA), and lateral gastrocnemius (GL) activities were measured by electromyography.
# Results
The activities of GM, GL, and ST from initial contact to early periods during landing into the ground with the FFS are larger than those with RFS. In addition, the results showed significant differences in lower-limb angles and GRFs between the FFS and RFS.
# Conclusion
These results suggest that there might be differences in ACL injury risk during a 180° turn between the FFS and the RFS pattern. An investigation into the grounding method that prevents injury is necessary in future studies.
# Levels of Evidence
Level 3b |
|---|