The aim of this study was to determine the effect of the time between measures on ground reaction force running variability; 15 healthy men (age = 23.8 ± 3.7 years; weight = 72.8 ± 7.7 kg; height 174.3 ± 8.4 cm) performed two trials of running 45 minutes at 9 km/hr at intervals of seven days. The ground reaction forces were recorded every 5 minutes. The coefficients of variation of indicative parameters of the ground reaction forces for each condition were compared. The coefficients of variations of the ground reaction forces curve analyzed between intervals and sessions were 21.9% and 21.48%, respectively. There was no significant difference for the ground reaction forces parameters Fy1, tFy1, TC1, Imp50, Fy2, and tFy2 between intervals and sessions. Although the ground reaction forces variables present a natural variability, this variability in intervals and in sessions remained consistent, ensuring a high reliability in repeated measures designs.
BartlettR.WheatJ.RobinsM. (2007) Is movement variability important for sports biomechanists?Sports Biomechanics6: 224–243.
2.
BrughelliM.CroninJ.ChaouachiA. (2011) Effects of running velocity on running kinetics and kinematics. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research25: 933–939.
3.
DavidsJ. R.OunpuuS.DeLucaP. A.DavisR. B. (2004) Optimization of walking ability of children with cerebral palsy. Instructional Course Lecture53: 511–522.
4.
ElliottB. C.BlanksbyB. A. (1976) A cinematographic analysis of overground andtreadmill running by males and females. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise8(2): 84–87.
5.
FerberR.McClay DavisI.WilliamsD. S.LaughtonC. (2002) A comparison of within- and between-day reliability of discrete 3D lower extremity variables in runners. Journal of Orthopedic Research20: 1139–1145.
6.
JohnsonS. T.GoldenG. M.MercerJ. A.MangusB. C.HoffmanM. A. (2005) Ground-reaction forces during perform skipping and running. Journal of Sport Rehabilitation14: 338–345.
7.
JonesE. G.WattD. G. D. (1971) Observations on the control of stepping and hopping movements in man. The Journal of Physiology219: 709–727.
8.
JordanK.ChallisJ. H.NewellK. M. (2007) Speed influences on the scaling behavior of gait cycle fluctuations during treadmill running. Human Movement Science26: 87–102.
9.
KadabaM. P.RamakrishnanH. K.WoottenM. E.GaineyJ.GortonG.CochranG. V. (1989) Repeatability of kinematic, kinetic and electromiographic data in normal adult gait. Journal of Orthopedic Research7: 849–860.
10.
KellerT. S.WeisbergerA. M.RayJ. L.HasanS. S.ShiaviR. G.SpenglerD. M. (1996) Relantionship between vertical ground reaction force and speed during walking, slow, jogging, and running. Clinical Biomechanics11: 253–259.
11.
KesarT. M.Binder-MacleodS. A.HicksG. E.ReismanD. S. (2011) Minimal detectable change for gait variables collected during treadmill walking in individuals post-stroke. Gait & Posture33: 414–317.
12.
LakeM. J. (2000) Determining the protective function of sports footwear. Ergonomics43: 1610–1621.
13.
LatashM. L.AnsonJ. G. (2006) Synergies in health and disease: Relations to adaptive changes in motor coordination. Physical Therapy86: 1151–1160.
14.
MasaniK.KouzakiM.FukunagaT. (2002) Variability of ground reaction forces during treadmill walking. Journal of Applied Physiology92: 1885–1890.
15.
NiggB. M.De BoerR. W.FisherV. (1995) A kinematic comparison of overground and treadmill running. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise27(1): 98–105.
16.
NiggB. M.DenothJ.NeukommP. A. (1981) Quantifying the load on the human body: Problems and some possible solutions. In: JonssonB. (ed.) Biomechanics VII-B, Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, pp. 88–89.
17.
QueenR. M.GrossM. T.LiuH. Y. (2006) Repeatability of lower extremity kinetics and kinematics for standardized and self-selected running speeds. Gait Posture23: 282–287.
18.
RileyP. O.DicharryJ.FranzJ.CroceU.DellaW. R. P.KerriganD. C. (2008) A kinematics and kinetic comparison of overground and treadmill running. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise40(6): 1093–1100.
19.
StergiouN. (2004) Innovative analyses of human movement. Illustrated edition, Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, pp. 331.
20.
StergiouN.DeckerL. M. (2011) Human movement variability, nonlinear dynamics, and pathology: Is there a connection?Human Movement Science30: 869–888.
21.
StergiouN.HarbourneR.CavanaughJ. (2006) Optimal movement variability: A new theoretical perspective for neurologic physical therapy. Journal of Neurologic Physical Therapy30: 120–129.
22.
WeirJ. P. (2005) Quantifying test-retest reliability using the intraclass correlation coefficient and the SEM. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research19(1): 231–240.
23.
WinterD. A. (1984) Kinematic and kinetic patterns in human gait: Variability and compensating effects. Human movement Science3: 51–76.
24.
WinterD. A. (1991) The biomechanics and motor control of human gait: Normal, elderly and pathological, 2nd ed. Waterloo, ON: University of Waterloo Press.
