Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Foot Ankle Int ; 35(1): 63-70, 2014 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24259750

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Limited ankle joint dorsiflexion passive range of motion (PROM) has been associated with common chronic lower extremity conditions, and clinicians often instruct patients in stretching exercises to increase dorsiflexion. However, little is known about how subtalar joint (STJ) position affects dorsiflexion at the midfoot/forefoot versus ankle/rearfoot during gastrocnemius stretching. The purpose of this study was to determine if more dorsiflexion occurs at the ankle/rearfoot and less at the midfoot/forefoot during gastrocnemius stretching with the STJ positioned in supination versus pronation. METHODS: In this repeated measures design, 27 participants (23 females, 4 males; mean age = 31.3 years, SD = 10.7) with current or recent history of lower extremity chronic conditions and less than 10 degrees ankle dorsiflexion measured with the knee in extension on the involved side(s) performed five 30-second gastrocnemius stretching trials in pronation and supination on each side in a randomly determined sequence. A 7-camera Vicon Motion Analysis System and an AMTI force plate were used to measure midfoot/forefoot dorsiflexion, ankle/rearfoot dorsiflexion, knee extension, and normalized vertical ground reaction force. RESULTS: Two-way repeated measures ANOVA revealed a significant increase in midfoot/forefoot dorsiflexion when stretching in pronation compared to supination (P < .001). ANOVAs also demonstrated significantly more extension of the knee when stretching in supination compared to pronation (P < .001), and increased normalized vertical ground reaction force when stretching in supination compared to pronation (P = .032). With the numbers available, no significant difference in ankle/rearfoot dorsiflexion when stretching in supination compared to pronation could be detected (P > .05). CONCLUSION: Gastrocnemius stretching in pronation resulted in more dorsiflexion at the midfoot/forefoot than stretching in supination. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Clinicians may want to consider STJ position during gastrocnemius stretching to either facilitate or limit recruitment of dorsiflexion motion at the midfoot/forefoot.


Subject(s)
Ankle Joint/physiology , Foot/physiology , Muscle Stretching Exercises , Muscle, Skeletal/physiology , Subtalar Joint/physiology , Supination/physiology , Adult , Female , Forefoot, Human/physiology , Humans , Male , Musculoskeletal Diseases/physiopathology , Pronation/physiology , Range of Motion, Articular , Young Adult
2.
HERD ; 4(2): 91-108, 2011.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21465437

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Two studies were conducted to obtain an understanding of the types of items seniors keep in their nightstands and to understand how users feel about the possibility of "smart" furniture. BACKGROUND: To enable aging in place and universal design, it is vital to understand the needs of a broad range of aging individuals, especially since there is little research on nightstand usage and design. METHODS: Study 1 allowed for the development of a structured inventory of nightstand use today in assisted living and rehabilitation facilities. Study 1 led to Study 2, demonstrating the need to conceptualize new ideas for smart nightstands. Feedback was obtained from intergenerational participants who could discuss their needs and preferences for a smart nightstand. RESULTS: In Study 1, more than 150 items were recorded and categorized into 25 different groups. The authors found that participants utilized the top portion of their nightstand as opposed to the lower sections; most items were found on top of the nightstand or in the top drawer. In Study 2, the authors found that the vast majority of participants are willing to consider the use of a smart nightstand. Participants discussed key functions and design preferences, which included carefully designed storage, the ability to move the nightstand up and down, contemporary design, and interaction through voice activation. CONCLUSION: Existing nightstands do not meet the needs of current users. This research provides greater understanding of the existing limitations associated with nightstands. Study 2 confirmed that user-centered design and the use of technology can be used to enhance daily living. Smart furniture may play a role in promoting the health and independence of diverse user groups.


Subject(s)
Activities of Daily Living , Assisted Living Facilities , Interior Design and Furnishings/standards , Rehabilitation Centers , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Aging/physiology , Aging/psychology , Equipment Design , Female , Humans , Interior Design and Furnishings/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Mobility Limitation , Needs Assessment , Robotics , United States
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...