China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Weight Lifting and Training
Published in Christopher L. Vaughan, Biomechanics of Sport, 2020
Force-plate analyses must go beyond vertical GRF patterns. Anterior-posterior- and mediolateral forces as well as balance patterns must be evaluated and interpreted for many additional weightlifting exercises. Force-plate data must also be incorporated into more sophisticated computer models to improve or verify accuracy.
Force plate
Published in Paul Grimshaw, Michael Cole, Adrian Burden, Neil Fowler, Instant Notes in Sport and Exercise Biomechanics, 2019
When a force is applied to the force plate, in-built transducers experience a deformation that is proportional to the magnitude of the force. This deformation subsequently produces a change in the voltage measured from the transducer that is proportional to the amount by which the transducer has deformed. Thus, the change in voltage measured by the transducer is proportional to the magnitude of force that it experiences. Force plates used in sport and exercise biomechanics use either strain gauge or piezoelectric transducers. Although piezoelectric platforms are more sensitive to rapid changes in force, they suffer from a change in output voltage with no change in applied force (i.e. drift). As such, they are more suited to measure forces from relatively short-lived, dynamic activities such as walking, running and jumping. Strain gauge plates are less susceptible to drift, but are not as sensitive as piezoelectric models. As such, they are preferred for recording forces from longer, less dynamic activities, such as archery or shooting.
Gait
Published in Manoj Ramachandran, Tom Nunn, Basic Orthopaedic Sciences, 2018
Pramod Achan, Mark Paterson, Fergal Monsell
Kinetics: the measurement of forces, moments, energy and power associated with body movements during gait. In order to determine these, data from a force plate are required in addition to kinematic data.
Evaluating validity of the Kids-Balance Evaluation Systems Test (Kids-BESTest) Clinical Test of Sensory Integration of Balance (CTSIB) criteria to categorise stance postural control of ambulant children with CP
Published in Disability and Rehabilitation, 2022
Rosalee M. Dewar, Kylie Tucker, Andrew P. Claus, Wolbert van den Hoorn, Robert S. Ware, Leanne M. Johnston
Atypical stance postural control has been demonstrated in children with CP using force plates [2,3]. Force plates provide data representing point application of the ground reaction force, or center-of-pressure (CoP), which reflects postural torques produced to maintain the CoM within the BoS. Center-of-pressure trajectory (representing postural sway) is commonly smaller in typically developing (TD) children than children with motor disorders such as CP [9]. For example, TD children show less sway with increasing age [10] and when compared to age and gender-matched children with CP [11,12]. Reduced stance sway following exercise interventions is also thought to indicate improved postural control for children with CP [13]. However, sway amplitude alone does not fully represent postural control in standing. For example, children with CP with altered sensorimotor control may show variations in CoP path length and/or velocity or use of strategies such as crouch or co-contraction during quiet stance [14]. A comparison of clinical Kids-BESTest CTSIB scores with a variety of CoP trajectory characteristics is needed to verify the validity of criteria within this clinical assessment tool.
Improvement in balance from diagnosis to return-to-play initiation following a sport-related concussion: BESS scores vs center-of-pressure measures
Published in Brain Injury, 2022
Sophia Ulman, Ashley L. Erdman, Alex Loewen, Hannah M. Worrall, Kirsten Tulchin-Francis, Jacob C. Jones, Jane S. Chung, Henry B. Ellis, C. Munro Cullum, Shane M. Miller
Although COP-based measures are considered an objective, ‘gold standard’ assessment for balance performance, there are numerous limitations to the clinical implementation of such measures. More obvious limitations are equipment costs that can range from approximately $5,000 to $18,000, and equipment portability, as force plates are considerably heavy and require specific setup and configuration prior to use. Second, while some interface platforms currently exist for commercial use, advanced data processing efforts are typically required to extract COP-based measures following patient testing. Finally, once values are obtained, the clinical interpretation of these measures may be unclear as pass/fail criteria considering COP-based measures or clinically relevant thresholds indicating impaired postural stability do not currently exist for post-concussion evaluations. Therefore, while recent literature has provided reference values for COP-based measures collected from healthy, adolescent populations (17,20–22), further research is needed in order to translate these measures into a clinical metric that can be used to support decision-making, such as the diagnosis of concussion or the assessment of an athlete’s readiness to RTP.
The measurement properties of the Lean-and-Release test in people with incomplete spinal cord injury or disease
Published in The Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine, 2022
Janelle Unger, Alison R. Oates, Joel Lanovaz, Katherine Chan, Jae W. Lee, Pirashanth Theventhiran, Kei Masani, Kristin E. Musselman
While some Lean-and-Release variables had good measurement properties for people with iSCI/D, the feasibility of the test in clinical practice remains in question. The setup used in this study requires the use of sophisticated laboratory equipment and a safety harness system. Force plates are required to record the temporal parameters, and a force transducer is crucial to standardize the amount of body weight that is assumed by the cable. While this instrumentation is important for measuring temporal variables, the behavioral response of the Lean-and-Release test could be measured without any instrumentation, as has been demonstrated using a similar test in people with acquired brain injuries.38 An advantage of the Lean-and-Release test compared to the reactive sub scale of the Mini-BESTest is that it is conducted up to 10 times, so the proportion of trials completed with a single step can be calculated, which may be a better indicator of reactive balance ability than a single test in each direction as is performed in the Mini-BESTest. It is possible that the Lean-and-Release test could be more responsive to change because of this, but further testing would be required to confirm.