東華大學圖書館 |

Language: English

Help

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

Back

Switch To: Labeled | MARC Mode | ISBD

Effects of various arch support tech...

Tarrant, Michelle.

Linked to FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Effects of various arch support techniques on the human running gait.

Record Type:	Electronic resources : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Effects of various arch support techniques on the human running gait./
Author:	Tarrant, Michelle.
Description:	80 p.
Notes:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 64-11, Section: B, page: 5481.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International64-11B.
Subject:	Health Sciences, Recreation. -
Online resource:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3114330
ISBN:	0496618237

Effects of various arch support techniques on the human running gait.
Tarrant, Michelle.

Effects of various arch support techniques on the human running gait. - 80 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 64-11, Section: B, page: 5481.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Texas Woman's University, 2003.

The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of various arch support techniques on the human running gait. Techniques analyzed included barefoot, shod, high-dye taping procedure, arch support taping procedure and Powerstep arch support insert. Effects of each of these interventions on rearfoot motion and the center of pressure during the stance phase of running were analyzed. Participants were males and females (N = 26) between 18 and 41 years of age with no lower leg injury within six months of the study. The PEAK Motus motion analysis system analyzed rearfoot motion and KWON GRF analyzed center of pressure. The main effects for between groups and within groups across the 5 interventions for the rearfoot angle variable (F = .326, p = .574) and for the center of pressure variable (F = 1.139, p = .296) found no significant difference. A significant interaction was found between groups for Rearfoot Angle. A Tukey Post Hoc test (q = (5,24) = 4.17, p < .05) determined significance for barefoot running (q = -5.2975) and the arch taping technique (q = 4.2861). There was not an effect on the center of pressure pattern during running. There was a significant difference between neutral runners and pronators in regards to rearfoot angle during running for the barefoot and arch taping technique intervention. Applying an intervention to a neutral runner results in a total range of motion greater than the total range of motion for pronators.

ISBN: 0496618237Subjects--Topical Terms:

1018003
Health Sciences, Recreation.

Effects of various arch support techniques on the human running gait.
LDR:02344nmm 2200277 4500 001 1843043
005 20051010101552.5
008 130614s2003 eng d
020 $a 0496618237
035 $a (UnM)AAI3114330
035 $a AAI3114330
040 $a UnM $c UnM
100 1 $a Tarrant, Michelle. $3 1931286
245 1 0 $a Effects of various arch support techniques on the human running gait.
300 $a 80 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 64-11, Section: B, page: 5481.
500 $a Adviser: Jerry Wilkerson.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--Texas Woman's University, 2003.
520 $a The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of various arch support techniques on the human running gait. Techniques analyzed included barefoot, shod, high-dye taping procedure, arch support taping procedure and Powerstep arch support insert. Effects of each of these interventions on rearfoot motion and the center of pressure during the stance phase of running were analyzed. Participants were males and females (N = 26) between 18 and 41 years of age with no lower leg injury within six months of the study. The PEAK Motus motion analysis system analyzed rearfoot motion and KWON GRF analyzed center of pressure. The main effects for between groups and within groups across the 5 interventions for the rearfoot angle variable (F = .326, p = .574) and for the center of pressure variable (F = 1.139, p = .296) found no significant difference. A significant interaction was found between groups for Rearfoot Angle. A Tukey Post Hoc test (q = (5,24) = 4.17, p < .05) determined significance for barefoot running (q = -5.2975) and the arch taping technique (q = 4.2861). There was not an effect on the center of pressure pattern during running. There was a significant difference between neutral runners and pronators in regards to rearfoot angle during running for the barefoot and arch taping technique intervention. Applying an intervention to a neutral runner results in a total range of motion greater than the total range of motion for pronators.
590 $a School code: 0925.
650 4 $a Health Sciences, Recreation. $3 1018003
650 4 $a Biophysics, General. $3 1019105
690 $a 0575
690 $a 0786
710 2 0 $a Texas Woman's University. $3 1017666
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 64-11B.
790 1 0 $a Wilkerson, Jerry, $e advisor
790 $a 0925
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2003
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3114330