@article{75a7b77465f64a6d93e7d468d9f6a929,
title = "Lumbopelvic coordination while walking in service members with unilateral lower limb loss: Comparing variabilities derived from vector coding and continuous relative phase",
abstract = "Background: Continuous relative phase and vector coding are two common approaches for quantifying lumbopelvic coordination and variability. Evaluating the application of such methodologies to the lower limb loss population is important for better understanding reported asymmetrical movement dynamics of the lumbopelvic region. Research Question: How do coordination variabilities derived from trunk-pelvic coupling angles and continuous relative phases compare among individuals with and without unilateral lower limb loss walking at self-selected speeds? Methods: Full-body kinematics were obtained from thirty-eight males with unilateral lower limb loss (23 transtibial and 15 transfemoral) and fifteen males without limb loss while walking along a 15 m walkway. Coordination variabilities were derived from trunk-pelvic coupling angles and continuous relative phases and compared using a multivariate approach, as well as in unilateral outcome measures between control participants and participants with lower limb loss. Results: Overall, tri-planar measures of continuous relative phase variability were 19–43% larger compared to coupling angle variabilities for individuals without limb loss and individuals with transtibial limb loss. Individuals with transfemoral limb loss had 27% and 31% larger sagittal and transverse variabilities from continuous relative phases compared to coupling angles, respectively. During both prosthetic and intact limb stance, individuals with transtibial limb loss had 19–35% greater tri-planar measures of continuous relative phase variability compared to coupling angle variabilities. During intact stance phase, tri-planar measures of continuous relative phase variability were 27%− 42% larger compared to coupling angle variabilities for individuals without limb loss. Significance: While both methods provide valid estimates of lumbopelvic movement variability during gait, continuous relative phase variability may provide a more sensitive estimate in the lower limb loss population capturing velocity-specific motions of the trunk and pelvis.",
keywords = "Amputation, Biomechanics, Pathomechanics",
author = "Wasser, {Joseph G.} and Acasio, {Julian C.} and Miller, {Ross H.} and Hendershot, {Brad D.}",
note = "Funding Information: This work was supported, in part, by the Center for Rehabilitation Sciences Research, of the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences (award HU0001–15-2–003 ; PI: Paul F. Pasquina), and the Extremity Trauma and Amputation Center of Excellence (Public Law 110–417 ; National Defense Authorization Act 2009, section 723). The views expressed in this manuscript are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policies of the Henry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, the U.S. Departments of the Army, Navy, Air Force, Defense, nor the United States Government. The opinions and assertions expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Uniformed Services University or the Department of Defense. The identification of specific products or instrumentation is considered an integral part of the scientific endeavor and does not constitute an endorsement or implied endorsement on the part of the authors, Department of Defense, or any component agency. The authors also wish to acknowledge Dr. Alison Pruziner, PT, DPT, ATC, and Dr. Rebecca Krupenevich, Ph.D., for their contributions to idea formulation, project management, and data collection for the primary project from which this data was generated. Funding Information: This work was supported, in part, by the Center for Rehabilitation Sciences Research, of the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences (award HU0001?15-2?003; PI: Paul F. Pasquina), and the Extremity Trauma and Amputation Center of Excellence (Public Law 110?417; National Defense Authorization Act 2009, section 723). The views expressed in this manuscript are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policies of the Henry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, the U.S. Departments of the Army, Navy, Air Force, Defense, nor the United States Government. The opinions and assertions expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Uniformed Services University or the Department of Defense. The identification of specific products or instrumentation is considered an integral part of the scientific endeavor and does not constitute an endorsement or implied endorsement on the part of the authors, Department of Defense, or any component agency. The authors also wish to acknowledge Dr. Alison Pruziner, PT, DPT, ATC, and Dr. Rebecca Krupenevich, Ph.D. for their contributions to idea formulation, project management, and data collection for the primary project from which this data was generated. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2021 Elsevier B.V.",
year = "2022",
month = feb,
doi = "10.1016/j.gaitpost.2021.11.032",
language = "English",
volume = "92",
pages = "284--289",
journal = "Gait and Posture",
issn = "0966-6362",
}