Send to

Choose Destination
J Sports Sci. 2018 Feb;36(3):293-302. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2017.1303186. Epub 2017 Mar 21.

Lower extremity kinematics of curve sprinting displayed by runners using a transtibial prosthesis.

Author information

a Department of Kinesiology , California State University , Chico , CA , USA.
b Department of Kinesiology , University of Georgia , Athens , GA , USA.
c Department of Rehabilitation , Jönköping University , Jönköping , Sweden.
d Millsboro , DE , USA.
e Department of Kinesiology and Health Promotion , University of Kentucky , Lexington , KY , USA.


The purpose of the study was to determine if the kinematics exhibited by skilled runners wearing a unilateral, transtibial prosthesis during the curve section of a 200-m sprint race were influenced by interaction of limb-type (prosthetic limb (PROS-L) vs. nonprosthetic limb (NONPROS-L)) and curve-side (inside and outside limb relative to the centre of the curve). Step kinematics, toe clearance and knee and hip flexion/extension, hip ab/adduction for one stride of each limb were generated from video of 13 males running the curve during an international 200 m transtibial-classified competition. Using planned comparisons (P < 0.05), limb-type and curve-side interactions showed shortest support time and lowest hip abduction displacement by outside-NONPROS-L; shortest step length and longest time to peak knee flexion by the inside-PROS-L. For limb-type, greater maximum knee flexion angle and lower hip extension angles and displacement during support and toe clearance of PROS-Ls occurred. For curve-side, higher hip abduction angles during non-support were displayed by inside-limbs. Therefore, practitioners should consider that, for curve running, these kinematics are affected mostly by PROS-L limitations, with no clear advantage of having the PROS-L on either side of the curve.


Running; below-knee amputation; biomechanics; prostheses

[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Loading ...
Support Center