Facial reconstruction

Search LJMU Research Online

Browse Repository | Browse E-Theses

A Kinematic Comparison of Gait with A Backpack Versus A Trolley for Load Carriage in Children.

Orantes-Gonzalez, E, Heredia-Jimenez, J and Robinson, MA (2019) A Kinematic Comparison of Gait with A Backpack Versus A Trolley for Load Carriage in Children. Applied Ergonomics, 80. pp. 28-34. ISSN 0003-6870

[img]
Preview
Text
A Kinematic Comparison of Gait with A Backpack Versus A Trolley for Load Carriage in Children. .pdf - Accepted Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives.

Download (1MB) | Preview

Abstract

The use of a school trolley is reaching and even surpassing the use of backpacks in many countries, although a recommended load has not been studied. To accomplish this, 3D gait kinematics of the lower limbs and thorax were analysed in 49 students walking unloaded, pulling a school trolley or carrying a backpack, all with either 10%, 15%, or 20% BW. The variables obtained were the degrees of flexion/extension, adduction/abduction and internal/external rotation of the thorax, pelvis, hip, knee and ankle. Statistical parametric mapping was used to evaluate differences between conditions and loads throughout the gait cycle. In the backpack conditions, the magnitudes of the differences decreased from proximal to distal joints compared to the unloaded condition. The use of a school trolley only required minor kinematic adaptations. Therefore, from kinematic analysis, it is recommended to avoid loads above 10% BW for children using a backpack and below 20% BW for children using a trolley.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: 1116 Medical Physiology, 1203 Design Practice and Management, 1106 Human Movement and Sports Sciences
Subjects: R Medicine > RC Internal medicine > RC1200 Sports Medicine
Divisions: Sport & Exercise Sciences
Publisher: Elsevier
Date Deposited: 20 Jun 2019 09:28
Last Modified: 04 Sep 2021 09:21
DOI or ID number: 10.1016/j.apergo.2019.05.003
URI: https://researchonline.ljmu.ac.uk/id/eprint/10761
View Item View Item