Home Changes in muscle activities and kinematics due to simulated leg length inequalities
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Changes in muscle activities and kinematics due to simulated leg length inequalities

  • Hannah Lena Siebers ORCID logo EMAIL logo , Jörg Eschweiler , Filippo Migliorini , Valentin Michael Quack , Markus Tingart and Marcel Betsch
Published/Copyright: April 22, 2021

Abstract

Muscle imbalances are a leading cause of musculoskeletal problems. One example are leg length inequalities (LLIs). This study aimed to analyze the effect of different (simulated) LLIs on back and leg muscles in combination with kinematic compensation mechanics. Therefore, 20 healthy volunteers were analyzed during walking with artificial LLIs (0–4 cm). The effect of different amounts of LLIs and significant differences to the reference condition without LLI were calculated of maximal joint angles, mean muscle activity, and its symmetry index. While walking, LLIs led to higher muscle activity and asymmetry of back muscles, by increased lumbar lateral flexion and pelvic obliquity. The rectus femoris showed higher values, independent of the amount of LLI, whereas the activity of the gastrocnemius on the shorter leg increased. The hip and knee flexion of the long leg increased significantly with increasing LLIs, like the knee extension and the ankle plantarflexion of the shorter leg. The described compensation mechanisms are explained by a dynamic lengthening of the short and shortening of the longer leg, which is associated with increased and asymmetrical muscle activity. Presenting this overview is important for a better understanding of the effects of LLIs to improve diagnostic and therapy in the future.


Corresponding author: Hannah Lena Siebers, Department of Orthopaedics, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstr. 30, 52074 Aachen, Germany, E-mail:

  1. Research funding: The authors state no funding is involved.

  2. Author contributions: All authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this manuscript and approved its submission.

  3. Competing interests: The authors state no conflict of interest.

  4. Informed consent: Informed consent has been obtained from all individuals included in this study.

  5. Ethical approval: The research related to human use complies with all the relevant national regulations, institutional policies and was performed in accordance with the tenets of the Helsinki Declaration, and has been approved by the authors’ institutional review board (EK 251/18).

References

1. Harries, M, editor. Oxford textbook of sports medicine, 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press; 2000.Search in Google Scholar

2. Gisler, T. Selektive Klassifizierung von Veränderungen im Muskelsystem: Teil I: Übersicht, Pathogenese und Klassifizierung. Schweizer Zeitschr Sport Med Traumato 2010;58:78–84.Search in Google Scholar

3. Bouchard, M. Assessment and management of the pediatric cavovarus foot. Instr Course Lect 2020;69:381–90.Search in Google Scholar

4. Petersen, W, Ellermann, A, Gösele-Koppenburg, A, Best, R, Rembitzki, I, Brüggemann, GP, et al.. Patellofemoral pain syndrome. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2014;22:2264–74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-013-2759-6.Search in Google Scholar

5. Yüksel, O, Ozgürbüz, C, Ergün, M, Islegen, C, Taskiran, E, Denerel, N, et al.. Inversion/eversion strength dysbalance in patients with medial tibial stress syndrome. J Sports Sci Med 2011;10:737–42.Search in Google Scholar

6. Newcomer, KL, Jacobson, TD, Gabriel, DA, Larson, DR, Brey, RH, An, K-N. Muscle activation patterns in subjects with and without low back pain. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2002;83:816–21. https://doi.org/10.1053/apmr.2002.32826.Search in Google Scholar

7. Perttunen, JR, Anttila, E, Sodergard, J, Merikanto, J, Komi, PV. Gait asymmetry in patients with limb length discrepancy. Scand J Med Sci Sports 2004;14:49–56. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0838.2003.00307.x.Search in Google Scholar

8. Khamis, S, Carmeli, E. Relationship and significance of gait deviations associated with limb length discrepancy: a systematic review. Gait Posture 2017;57:115–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2017.05.028.Search in Google Scholar

9. Khamis, S, Carmeli, E. The effect of simulated leg length discrepancy on lower limb biomechanics during gait. Gait Posture 2018;61:73–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2017.12.024.Search in Google Scholar

10. Zeitoune, G, Nadal, J, Batista, LA, Metsavaht, L, Moraes, AP, Leporace, G. Prediction of mild anatomical leg length discrepancy based on gait kinematics and linear regression model. Gait Posture 2019;67:117–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2018.09.027.Search in Google Scholar

11. Gurney, B. Leg length discrepancy. Gait Posture 2002;15:195–206. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0966-6362(01)00148-5.Search in Google Scholar

12. Defrin, R, Ben Benyamin, S, Aldubi, RD, Pick, CG. Conservative correction of leg-length discrepancies of 10mm or less for the relief of chronic low back pain. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2005;86:2075–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2005.06.012.Search in Google Scholar

13. Ashour, R, Abdelraouf, O, Abdallah, A, Sweif, R. Effect of footwear modification on postural symmetry and body balance in leg length Discrepancy: a randomized controlled study. Int J Osteopath Med 2019;32:13–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijosm.2019.02.001.Search in Google Scholar

14. Resende, RA, Kirkwood, RN, Deluzio, KJ, Cabral, S, Fonseca, ST. Biomechanical strategies implemented to compensate for mild leg length discrepancy during gait. Gait Posture 2016;46:147–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2016.03.012.Search in Google Scholar

15. Beeck, A, Quack, V, Rath, B, Wild, M, Michalik, R, Schenker, H, et al.. Dynamic evaluation of simulated leg length inequalities and their effects on the musculoskeletal apparatus. Gait Posture 2018;67:71–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2018.09.022.Search in Google Scholar

16. Gurney, B, Mermier, C, Robergs, R, Gibson, A, Rivero, D. Effects of limb-length discrepancy on gait economy and lower-extremity muscle activity in older adults. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2001;83:907–15. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-200106000-00013.Search in Google Scholar

17. Kutilek, P, Svoboda, Z, Viteckova, S, Hana, K, Vana, Z. Evaluation of the effect of heel lift on postural stability and symmetry of muscle activity. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil 2017;30:1037–44. https://doi.org/10.3233/bmr-169616.Search in Google Scholar

18. Vink, P, Kamphuisen, HA. Leg length inequality, pelvic tilt and lumbar back muscle activity during standing. Clin Biomech (Bristol) 1989;4:115–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/0268-0033(89)90049-1.Search in Google Scholar

19. Betsch, M, Rapp, W, Przibylla, A, Jungbluth, P, Hakimi, M, Schneppendahl, J, et al.. Determination of the amount of leg length inequality that alters spinal posture in healthy subjects using rasterstereography. Eur Spine J 2013;22:1354–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-013-2720-x.Search in Google Scholar

20. Faul, F, Erdfelder, E, Lang, A-G, Buchner, AG. *Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Methods 2007;39:175–91. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03193146.Search in Google Scholar

21. Hermens, HJ, Freriks, B, Disselhorst-Klug, C, Rau, G. Development of recommendations for SEMG sensors and sensor placement procedures. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 2000;10:361–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1050-6411(00)00027-4.Search in Google Scholar

22. NORAXON Inc. DTS EMG Sensor: User manual; 2013 [accessed 6 November 2019].Search in Google Scholar

23. MyoMotion, N. 3D Wireless Inertial Motion Measurement System. White Paper; 2013 [accessed 22 March 2018].Search in Google Scholar

24. Park, KH, Kim, KW, Kim, CH. Effect of leg length discrepancy on gait and Cobb’s angle. Korean J Sports Biomech 2016;26:101–13. https://doi.org/10.5103/kjsb.2016.26.1.101.Search in Google Scholar

25. Wild, M, Kuhlmann, B, Stauffenberg, A, Jungbluth, P, Hakimi, M, Rapp, W, et al.. Does age affect the response of pelvis and spine to simulated leg length discrepancies? A rasterstereographic pilot study. Eur Spine J 2014;23:1449–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-013-3152-3.Search in Google Scholar

26. Folb, S. MyoMuscle: User Guide 3.12; 2018 [accessed 25 March 2019].Search in Google Scholar

27. Burden, AM, Trew, M, Baltzopoulos, V. Normalisation of gait EMGs: a re-examination. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 2003;13:519–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1050-6411(03)00082-8.Search in Google Scholar

28. Ghazwan, A, Forrest, SM, Holt, CA, Whatling, GM. Can activities of daily living contribute to EMG normalization for gait analysis? PLoS One 2017;12:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174670.Search in Google Scholar

29. Folb, S. MyoMotion: User Guide 3.12. USA: Noraxon U.S.A. Inc.; 2018.Search in Google Scholar

30. Needham, R, Chockalingam, N, Dunning, D, Healy, A, Ahmed, EB, Ward, A. The effect of leg length discrepancy on pelvis and spine kinematics during gait. In: Grivas, TB, Kotwicki, T, editors. Research into spinal deformities, vol 8; 2012:104–7 pp.Search in Google Scholar

31. Vink, P, Huson, A. Lumbar back muscle activity during walking with a leg inequality. Acta Morphol Neerl Scand 1987;25:261–71.Search in Google Scholar

32. Franklin, S, Grey, MJ, Heneghan, N, Bowen, L, Li, F-X. Barefoot vs common footwear: a systematic review of the kinematic, kinetic and muscle activity differences during walking. Gait Posture 2015;42:230–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2015.05.019.Search in Google Scholar

33. Forghany, S, Nester, CJ, Richards, B. The effect of rollover footwear on the rollover function of walking. J Foot Ankle Res 2013;6:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/1757-1146-6-24.Search in Google Scholar

34. Mentiplay, BF, Banky, M, Clark, RA, Kahn, MB, Williams, G. Lower limb angular velocity during walking at various speeds. Gait Posture 2018;65:190–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2018.06.162.Search in Google Scholar

35. Liu, MQ, Anderson, FC, Schwartz, MH, Delp, SL. Muscle contributions to support and progression over a range of walking speeds. J Biomech 2008;41:3243–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2008.07.031.Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2020-10-07
Accepted: 2021-03-25
Published Online: 2021-04-22
Published in Print: 2021-10-26

© 2021 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 26.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/bmt-2020-0266/html
Scroll to top button