TY - JOUR
T1 - Lower limb flexion posture relates to energy absorption during drop landings with soldier-relevant body borne loads
AU - Brown, T. N.
AU - O'Donovan, M.
AU - Hasselquist, L.
AU - Corner, B.
AU - Schiffman, J. M.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2015.
PY - 2016
Y1 - 2016
N2 - Fifteen military personnel performed 30-cm drop landings to quantify how body borne load (light, ∼6 kg, medium, ∼20 kg, and heavy, ∼40 kg) impacts lower limb kinematics and knee joint energy absorption during landing, and determine whether greater lower limb flexion increases energy absorption while landing with load. Participants decreased peak hip (P = 0.002), and knee flexion (P = 0.007) posture, but did not increase hip (P = 0.796), knee (P = 0.427) or ankle (P = 0.161) energy absorption, despite exhibiting greater peak hip (P = 0.003) and knee (P = 0.001) flexion, and ankle (P = 0.003) dorsiflexion angular impulse when landing with additional load. Yet, when landing with the light and medium loads, greater hip (R2 = 0.500, P = 0.003 and R2 = 0.314, P = 0.030) and knee (R2 = 0.431, P = 0.008 and R2 = 0.342, P = 0.022) flexion posture predicted larger knee joint energy absorption. Thus, military training that promotes hip and knee flexion, and subsequently greater energy absorption during landing, may potentially reduce risk of musculoskeletal injury and optimize soldier performance.
AB - Fifteen military personnel performed 30-cm drop landings to quantify how body borne load (light, ∼6 kg, medium, ∼20 kg, and heavy, ∼40 kg) impacts lower limb kinematics and knee joint energy absorption during landing, and determine whether greater lower limb flexion increases energy absorption while landing with load. Participants decreased peak hip (P = 0.002), and knee flexion (P = 0.007) posture, but did not increase hip (P = 0.796), knee (P = 0.427) or ankle (P = 0.161) energy absorption, despite exhibiting greater peak hip (P = 0.003) and knee (P = 0.001) flexion, and ankle (P = 0.003) dorsiflexion angular impulse when landing with additional load. Yet, when landing with the light and medium loads, greater hip (R2 = 0.500, P = 0.003 and R2 = 0.314, P = 0.030) and knee (R2 = 0.431, P = 0.008 and R2 = 0.342, P = 0.022) flexion posture predicted larger knee joint energy absorption. Thus, military training that promotes hip and knee flexion, and subsequently greater energy absorption during landing, may potentially reduce risk of musculoskeletal injury and optimize soldier performance.
KW - Energy absorption
KW - Impact force
KW - Kinematics
KW - Kinetics
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84940975636&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.apergo.2015.06.004
DO - 10.1016/j.apergo.2015.06.004
M3 - Article
C2 - 26360194
SN - 0003-6870
VL - 52
SP - 54
EP - 61
JO - Applied Ergonomics
JF - Applied Ergonomics
ER -