Skip to main content
Download PDF

The effects of walking aids on shoulder joint kinematics in older persons: an initial study

BMC Geriatrics volume 23, Article number: 743 (2023) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Many older persons with degenerative physical functions use walking aids to improve their ambulation ability. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of walking aids with different configurations on shoulder joint motion in older persons.

Methods

The 3D motion capture system VICON was applied to collect data on gait parameters and shoulder motion characteristics of 6 older persons walking either independently or with the assistance of a footed walking frame and a wheeled walking frame. The different effects of walking aids on gait parameters and the shoulder joint motion of older individuals were quantitatively analyzed.

Results

The gait parameters of the older individuals changed significantly when they used walking frames to assist walking. Compared to independent walking, the range of motion of the shoulder joint was reduced by 79.92% in flexion when walking with a wheeled walking frame. Meanwhile, the range of motion in flexion, extension, and external rotation increased by 76.04%, 85.55%, and 110.99%, respectively, when walking with a footed walking frame.

Conclusion

The motion characteristics of shoulder joints in older persons were significantly affected by using different walking aids. These changes in shoulder joint motion characteristics will lead to potential diseases related to the shoulder musculoskeletal system. These findings are beneficial to determine a walking aid for older people.

Peer Review reports

Background

For decades, the rapid growth of the aging population is a worldwide social problem. With the progress of aging, the physiological functions of older people gradually degenerate, especially the degradation of their walking ability which has become one of the most important factors affecting their quality of life [1,2,3]. For example, the muscle strength of the lower limbs decreased by about 40% compared to adults in their 30 s, which would result in causing body balance function and decreasing their walking ability [4].

The use of walking aids can assist older people in walking, hereby improving cardiopulmonary function, and demonstrating positive significance for promoting the human physiological system and delaying the degradation of physiology functions [5,6,7]. Walking aids are divided into powered walking aids, functional electrical stimulation walking aids and non-powered walking aids according to the source of the driving force. Non-powered walking aids operated by both arms, such as footed walking frames or wheeled walkers, provide a stable support structure with four legs and are widely used among people in need [5, 8].

However, using walking frames can help older persons to reduce the load on the lower limbs at the cost of increasing the load on the upper limbs, which may increase the risk of potential diseases in the relative parts. Previous research showed that long-term use of walking frames can easily cause upper limb disorders, such as carpal tunnel syndrome, median neuropathy, stress fractures, and upper limb pain [9, 10]. When using a footed walking frame or a wheeled walker, the upper limbs must be moved symmetrically and together because of the construction of the frame and the confinement of motion in the sagittal plane [11]. The study conducted by Simoneau G. [12] showed that the individuals needed to lift the standard walking frame with upper limbs to make it move forward, and the joint moment produced at the shoulder during ambulation with the walking frame is of significant magnitude. The motion angle of the shoulder joint was the largest, followed by the elbow and wrist [13]. The study exerted that the joint range of motion of both upper limbs was absent or decreased when walking with a wheeled walker [14]. Basing the data of seven healthy young individuals using a walking frame, it was found that there were significant differences in shoulder joint moment under different weight-bearing states of the lower limbs [15]. It was pointed out that the activity of shoulder muscles increased to bear the load of lower limbs transfer and maintain balance in paraplegic patients who used a walking aid [16]. Other studies also attempted to investigate the biomechanical effects of different configurations of walking aids, while their focuses were mainly on the gait parameters, effects of balance ability, physiological energy cost or the kinematic and kinetics analyses of lower limbs [17,18,19,20]. However, the different effects of the motion characteristics on the upper limbs between the wheeled walking frame and footed walking frame have not been compared and described clearly.

Understanding the effects of different configurations of walking frames on the shoulder joints can help to analyze compensatory responses and injury risks of the upper limbs induced by using walking frames and to suggest an appropriate aid for older people. In this study, the motion data of a group of older individuals in normal walking and aids assisting walking were collected and analyzed. Two kinds of two-arm-operated walking aids including the wheeled walking frame and the footed walking frame were comparatively analyzed. This quantitative investigation focused on the different effects of walking aids on the motion characteristics of the shoulder joints of older individuals.

Methods

Experimental materials

Six healthy older individuals, including 4 males and 2 females, with an age of 65.00 ± 3.58 years, an average height of 1.63 ± 0.09 m, a weight of 68.41 ± 4.17 kg, and an average arm length of 0.51 ± 0.02 m, signed an informed consent form and participated in this experiment. All participants had no obvious visual or auditory impairment, or related medical history that had impacts on daily activities and their hands could perform the manipulation of walking aids autonomously. In addition, the participants can walk more than 10 m independently, without assistive devices.

The two-arm-operated walking frames employed in this experiment were a wheeled walker (FZK-3104, Fuzikon, Foshan, China) and a footed walking frame (YC8202, Fushide, Zhongshan, China), as shown in Fig. 1. The weights of wheeled walker and footed walking frame are 8 kg and 2.55 kg respectively.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Two configurations of walking frames employed in the experiment. a Wheeled walker; b Footed walking frame

Full size image

Experimental methods

Before each experiment, the basic physiological parameters were measured and the height of the wheeled walker and the footed walking frame were adjusted based on the height of the participant’s ulnar styloid process [21, 22]. All participants were trained to walk on the walking path with two configurations of walking frames in the gait laboratory. When using a wheeled walker, the user needed to push it forward. While using a footed walking frame, the user needed to lift it off the ground and place it at a comfortable distance [5, 9, 10]. Until the participants could use the walking frames proficiently, the experiment officially started. Three experimental tasks were carried out, including 1) walking independently through a horizontal walkway, 2) walking through a horizontal walkway with a wheeled walker, and 3) walking through a horizontal walkway with a footed walking frame, as shown in Fig. 2. The length of the walking path was 5 m to cover at least two complete gait cycles. Each task was repeated at least 6 times for each participant to make sure 6 groups of valid data were recorded. The average value of 6 repeated measurements were calculated, and then the average value of six older individuals were used to calculate the mean gait parameters. During the experiment, the order of tasks was random. Participants completed several tasks at a normal pace and were allowed to rest between each task.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Three tasks in the experiment. a Independent walking. b Walking with a wheeled walker. c Walking with a footed walking frame

Full size image

The 3D motion capture system (VICON, Oxford Metrics Limited, UK) was employed to achieve the motion data of all participants. This system was able to reconstruct body segments by capturing the position of anatomical markers with optical cameras ( 8 Vicon Vantage V5 Cameras) and then the kinematics of the joints of the corresponding segments were evaluated by the software (Vicon Nexus 1.8). According to the Plug-in-Gait full body model protocol, a total of 39 markers (14 mm in diameter) were fixed on the participant's head (4 markers), torso (5 markers), upper limbs (7 markers on the left upper limb, 7 markers on the right upper limb), pelvis (4 markers) and lower limbs (6 markers on the left lower limb and 6 markers on the right lower limb). The position of the pelvis was determined by marking the left and right anterior superior iliac spine (ASIS) and the left and right posterior superior iliac spine (PSIS) on the surface of the body. VICON collected the marker coordinates of participants at the same frequency (f = 100 Hz), and the data processing module was used to perform system calibration, data acquisition and data output. The spatio-temporal parameters such as cadence, walking speed, step length, step time, stride length, stride time, single support period, double support period, and the motion data of joints were calculated by VICON Nexus. In this experiment, the gait cycle and the motion cycle of the footed walking frame were divided as shown in Fig. 3. The gait cycle was from the left heel strike to the left heel strike again. The support period of left foot was from the left heel strike to left toe off, and the swing period of left foot was from the left toe off to the left heel strike again [23]. The support period of the footed walking frame was divided through the motion of wrist, because of the height of wrist would not change obviously during the support period of the footed walking frame. The gait parameters and motion data in one gait cycle were processed and analyzed. The joint angle − gait cycle relationship curves were obtained by normalizing and calculating the mean of the 6 older persons by MATLAB R2018b software. Descriptive data were expressed as mean ± standard deviation. The differences in the average data obtained among the three patterns of walking were analyzed with SPSS 23.0, the level of statistical significance was set at 0.05 [14]. The normality test and homogeneity of variances test were conducted at first. If the data satisfied both conditions simultaneously, the ANOVA analysis was performed, otherwise the Nonparametric test was performed.

Fig. 3
figure 3

Gait cycle of older individuals and the motion cycle of the footed walking frame

Full size image

Results

Gait parameters

Six gait parameters of older individuals with ANOVA analysis were displayed in Table 1 and two gait parameters of older individuals with Nonparametric Test were displayed in Table 2. The statistical analysis revealed that there were significant differences in the gait parameters of the participants when they completed different tasks. Compared with independent walking, it produced significant decreases in cadence by walking with two configurations walking aids. And the step time, stride time, and double support period increased significantly when using the footed walking frame, whereas the step length, stride length, walking speed decreased significantly. Compared with using the wheeled walker, the footed walking frame had more significant effects on older individuals, such as increases of step time, stride time, and decreases of cadence, stride length, and single support period.

Table 1 The effects of different walking frames on gait parameters with ANOVA analysis
Full size table
Table 2 The effects of different walking frames on gait parameters with Nonparametric Test
Full size table

Motion characteristics of pelvis

The rotational angle-gait cycle curves of the pelvis in sagittal, coronal, and horizontal planes in the different tasks were listed in Fig. 4. When walking independently, the peak of the anteversion angle of the pelvis in the sagittal plane reached 13.15°, which was similar with the results of Murray et al. [24]. Walking with both aids caused additional anteversion of the pelvis in the sagittal plane in the individuals. When walking with the wheeled walker, the rotational angle was greater than independent walking with a peak inclination of 19.98°. When walking using the walking frame, the pelvic anteversion angle varied with the distance between the body and the walking frame, which reached a peak value of 25.18° at the end of the support period. The pelvic rotational angles were inapparent in the coronal plane and horizontal plane.

Fig. 4
figure 4

Comparison of the motion angles of the pelvis

Full size image

Motion characteristics of the shoulder joint

The rotational angles of shoulder joints in the sagittal, coronal and horizontal planes in a whole gait cycle when the participants did the three tasks subsequently were shown in Fig. 5.

Fig. 5
figure 5

Comparison of the motion angles of the shoulder joints

Full size image

The rotational angles of the left and right shoulder joints in the sagittal plane were shown in Fig. 5(a) and (b), respectively. When walking independently, the arms swung backward with a peak extension angle of 21.07° and forward with a peak flexion angle of 10.70° alternately. When the wheeled walker was used, the rotational direction of the shoulder joints on both sides were the same, and the flexion angle was relatively stable (17.95°-22.55°), while the peak flexion angle was approximately 12.39° higher than that of independent walking. When a footed walking frame was used to assist walking, the rotational angle of the shoulder joints on both sides of the support period was characterized first by extension backward with a peak angle of 22.21°. With lifting the walking frame forward, the shoulder joints were flexed forward with a peak angle of 29.73°. Since the start of the swing period, as the distance between the body and the walking frame decreased gradually, the flexion angle of the shoulder joint decreased gradually to -6.64°, that is, the shoulder joint was slightly extended backward.

The rotation characteristics of the left and right shoulder joints in the coronal plane were shown in Fig. 5(c) and (d). It was found that the participants had a certain degree of abduction on both sides of the shoulder joints in three tasks. The abduction angle of the shoulder joint was the smallest when the participants walked independently with an average abduction angle of 16.32° on the left sides and 16.43° on the right sides, respectively. When using the wheeled walker, the average abduction angle of the left shoulder joint was 24.07°, and that of the right shoulder joint was 23.32°. When the participants walked using the walking frame, the average abduction angle of the left shoulder joint was 30.40°, and that of the right shoulder joint was 22.82°.

The rotational characteristics of the left and right shoulder joints in the horizontal plane were shown in Fig. 5(e) and (f). The participants had external rotation on both shoulder joints when walking with and without walking aids. When the participants walked independently, the average external rotation angles of the left and right shoulder joints in the gait cycle were 14.71° and 21.07°, respectively. When using the wheeled walker, the average external rotation angles of the left and right shoulder joints were 16.82° and 18.19°, respectively. When using the walking frame, the external rotation angles of the shoulder joints on both sides first increased and then decreased in the support period. The peak external rotation angle of the left side was 34.29°, and 32.37° of the right side, and separately decreased to 18.56° and 13.30° at the end of the support period. Since the start of the swing period, the external rotation angle of the shoulder joints on both sides increased gradually again.

Range of motion in the shoulder joints

The range of motion in the shoulder joints of the participants in different tasks were shown in Fig. 6. Compared with walking independently, the rotational range of motion in the shoulder joint was significantly decreased in the sagittal plane by using the wheeled walker. Similarly, the rotational range of motion in the shoulder joint was significantly increased in the sagittal and horizontal planes when the participants walked with the walking frame.

Fig. 6
figure 6

Range of motion of the shoulder joints. a Left shoulder joint. b Right shoulder joint. Statistical significance: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.

Full size image

Discussion

Walking aids are important rehabilitation devices that assist older adults to perform daily activities. When the older individuals walking with a aid, the upper limbs compensate for the lower limb functions and reduce the load on the lower limbs, which is of great significance for improving walking ability, satisfying their social needs, and reducing the burden of social management [3, 25,26,27,28]. However, the significant changes in the gait parameters of older individuals are caused by the use of walking aids [29]. It is due to the lag of the lower limbs’ motion as a result of walking aids supporting the human body weight and restricting forward when the user pushes or lifts walking aids, which is consistent with the conclusion of Pardo et al. [30].

The pelvis is not only the driving structure of the lower extremities but also the foundation of the upper body during walking. Walking can cause 13.6° forward tilt of the pelvis [24, 31], which is similar to the pelvic anteversion angle in the sagittal plane obtained in this experiment when the participants walked independently. Because of the pelvic anteversion angle increased when the participants used the wheeled walker or the walking frame, the upper limbs required a greater rotational angle to maintain balance. The use of walking aids changes the normal walking pattern, which has a certain impact on the upper limb musculoskeletal system [32]. Therefore, this experiment further studied the effects of different configurations of walking aids on the motion characteristics of the shoulder joints of older individuals by quantitative analysis.

During walking with the wheeled walker, the flexion angle of the shoulder joint in the sagittal plane became larger in pace with the increases in pelvic anteversion angle. Furthermore, the distance between the body and the wheeled walker was relatively stable, so the range of motion of the shoulder joint in the sagittal plane was significantly reduced, which would result in a high flexion angle with narrow range of motion of the joint for a long time. It has been reported that absence or decrease of the joint range of motion of both upper extremities, particularly the shoulder joint, will lead to joint stiffness of upper extremity [14]. The joint stiffness of upper extremity may increase the joint stress under daily activity loads [33]. Therefore, long-term use of wheeled walker is prone to secondary shoulder dysfunction, such as lack or stiffness of the shoulder joint motion, shoulder pain, joint contracture, and osteoporosis [34].

When walking with the footed walking frame, the participant and the walking frame were the furthest apart and the pelvic anteversion angle reached approximately twice that of independent walking in the end of double support period. And the upper limbs moved from extension to the maximum flexion in the sagittal plane, and the external rotation angle decreases in the horizontal plane. Compared with independent walking, the range of motion of the shoulder joint was significantly increased in the sagittal and horizontal planes. Excessive shoulder motion will cause repetitive stress on the shoulder joint and add the load on the muscles around the shoulder joint. Long-term use of a walking frame will also cause cumulative injuries, such as internal wear, rotator cuff injury, and peripheral bursitis [35, 36].

Limitation

There still are few factors need to be taken into consideration. There may be some differences in physical function between healthy older individuals and the dyskinesia ones. However, the degree of physical decline in the older persons is personalized and difficult to be controlled. To decrease the influence of individuation, six healthy participants without any motion abnormalities were invited. Although data consistency can be observed, the sample size is relatively small. In future, classification research will be conducted based on the different dyskinesias of older individuals with a larger number of participants. In addition, this initial study focused on the motion characteristics of the shoulder joints. Inverse dynamic calculation, and finite element modeling and simulation analysis will be conducted to further evaluate the stress changes in the shoulder joint when the older persons walking with different configurations of walking aids and whether these changes are clinically meaningful.

Conclusion

This paper explores the effects of different configurations of walking frames on the motion characteristics of the shoulder joints of the older individuals. By comparisons, it was found that the use of walking frames significantly affects the motion of the shoulder joints of the older individuals. The use of a wheeled walker increases the flexion angle of the shoulder joint in the sagittal plane, but the range of motion is significantly reduced, which may lead to secondary shoulder dysfunction. Using a walking frame increases the range of motion of the joint significantly in the sagittal and horizontal planes, which will cause cumulative damage to the shoulder joint and induce musculoskeletal diseases of the shoulder joints. Therefore, the motion characteristics of the upper limbs should be considered when selecting a walking frame to ensure that it fits the functional requirements and physical capabilities of users. This study provides a reference for determining walking aids for older people.

Availability of data and materials

All data are available upon reasonable request to the corresponding authors Chunjing Tao (chunjingtao@buaa.edu.cn) and Yubo Fan (yubofan@buaa.edu.cn).

References

  1. Aboutorabi A, Arazpour M, Bahramizadeh M, Hutchins SW, Fadayevatan R. The effect of aging on gait parameters in able-bodied older subjects: a literature review. Aging Clin Exp Res. 2015;28:393–405. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-015-0420-6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Härdi I, Bridenbaugh SA, Gschwind YJ, Kressig RW. The effect of three different types of walking aids on spatio-temporal gait parameters in community-dwelling older adults. Aging Clin Exp Res. 2014;26:221–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-014-0204-4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Po-Chan Y, Cherng-Yee L. Using walker during walking:a pilot study for health elder. Work. 2012; 41(06):2081–5. https://doi.org/10.3233/wor-2012-0434-2081

  4. Lee Y-K, Yang C-M, Kim S, Jung J-Y, Kim J-J. Development of a Caterpillar-type walker for the elderly people. Appl Sci. 2021;12:383. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12010383.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Martins MM, Santos CP, Frizera-Neto A, Ceres R. Assistive mobility devices focusing on smart walkers: classification and review. Robot Auton Syst. 2012;60:548–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.robot.2011.11.015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Ishikura T. Biomechanical analysis of weight bearing force and muscle activation levels in the lower extremities during gait with a walker. Acta Med Okayama. 2001;55:73–82. https://doi.org/10.18926/AMO/32008

  7. Tat CC, Parasuraman S, Ahamed Khan MK, Elamvazuthi I. Walking support system for ageing community. 2018 International Conference on Recent Trends in Electrical, Control and Communication (RTECC). Malaysia, 2018;28–34. https://doi.org/10.1109/rtecc.2018.8625641

  8. Fareed N, Southerland LT, Rao BM, Sieck CJ. Geriatric assistive devices improve older patient engagement and clinical care in an emergency department. Am J Emerg Med. 2021;46:656–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajem.2020.07.073.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bateni H, Maki BE. Assistive devices for balance and mobility: Benefits, demands, and adverse consequences. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86:134–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2004.04.023.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Mcquade KJ, Finley M, Oliveira AS. Upper Extremity joint stresses during walkerassisted ambulation in post-surgical patients. Braz J Phys Ther. 2011;15:332–7. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1413-35552011005000007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Crosbie J. Kinematics of walking frame ambulation. Clin Biomech. 1993;8:31–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0268-0033(05)80007-5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Simoneau G, Hambrook G, Bachschmidt R, Harris G. Quantifying upper extremity efforts when using a walking frame. Pediatric Gait, A new Millennium in Clinical Care and Motion Analysis Technology. Chicago: IEEE; 2000;210–216. https://doi.org/10.1109/PG.2000.858900.

  13. Tat CC, Jauw, VL, Parasuraman S. (2012). Kinematics and kinetics studies on upper extremity during walking frame ambulation. In: Ponnambalam, S.G., Parkkinen, J., Ramanathan, K.C. (eds) Trends in intelligent robotics, automation, and manufacturing. IRAM 2012. Communications in Computer and Information Science. Berlin: Springer; 2012. p. 330: 206–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-35197-6_23

  14. Guo Y, Zhao Y, Salem Y, Miller K, Quiben M, Liu H. Postural effect on gait characteristics by using rolling walkers. Geriatr Nurs. 2020;41:916–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gerinurse.2020.06.017.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bachschmidt RA, Harris GF, Simoneau GG. Walker-assisted gait in rehabilitation: a study of biomechanics and instrumentation. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2001;9:96–105. https://doi.org/10.1109/7333.918282.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Baniasad M, Farahmand F, Arazpour M, Zohoor H. Role and significance of trunk and upper extremity muscles in walker-assisted paraplegic gait: a case study. Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil. 2018;24:18–27. https://doi.org/10.1310/sci16-00061.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Choi H-J, Ko C-Y, Kang S, Ryu J, Mun M, Jeon H-S. Effects of balance ability and handgrip height on kinematics of the gait, torso, and pelvis in elderly women using a four-wheeled Walker. Geriatr Gerontol Int. 2014;15:182–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/ggi.12246.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Omana HA, Madou E, Divine A, et al. The effect of first-time 4-wheeled walker use on the gait of younger and older adults. PM R. 2021;1–10. https://doi.org/10.1002/pmrj.12700

  19. Omana H, Madou E, Divine A, Wittich W, Hill KD, Johnson AM, et al. The differential effect of first-time single-point cane use between healthy young and older adults. PM R. 2021;13:1399–409. https://doi.org/10.1002/pmrj.12559.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Cetin E, Muzembo J, Pardessus V, Puisieux F, Thevenon A. Impact of different types of walking aids on the physiological energy cost during gait for elderly individuals with several pathologies and dependent on a technical aid for walking. Ann Phys Rehabil Med. 2010;53:399–405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rehab.2010.06.003.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Thies SB, Russell R, Al-Ani A, et al. An investigation of the effects of walking frame height and width on walking stability. Gait Posture. 2020;82(Suppl 2):248–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2020.09.017.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Konop K A , Strifling K M B , Wang M, et al. A biomechanical analysis of upper extremity kinetics in children with cerebral palsy using anterior and posterior walkers. Gait Posture. 2009; 30(3):364–369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2009.06.012.

  23. Murray MP, Kory RC, Clarkson BH. Walking patterns in healthy old men. J Gerontol. 1969;24:169–78. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronj/24.2.169.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Murray MP, Mollinger LA, Gardner GM, Sepic SB. Kinematic and EMG patterns during slow, free, and fast walking. J Orthop Res. 1984;2:272–80. https://doi.org/10.1002/jor.1100020309.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Edelstein J. Canes, crutches, and walkers. Atlas of orthoses and assistive devices. 2019; 377–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-323-48323-0.00036-6

  26. Crosbie J. Comparative kinematics of two walking frame gaits. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1994;20:186–92. https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.1994.20.4.186.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Tung JY, Gage WH, Zabjek KF, Maki BE, McIlroy WE. Frontal plane standing balance with an ambulation aid:upper limb biomechanics. J Biomech. 2011;44:1466–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2011.03.015.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Cai XY, YuChi CX, Du CF, Mo ZJ. The effect of follower load on the range of motion, facet joint force, and intradiscal pressure of the cervical spine: a finite element study. Med Biol Eng Compu. 2020;58:1695–705. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11517-020-02189-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Liu H, McGee M, Wang W, Persson M. Comparison of gait characteristics between older rolling walker users and older potential walker users. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2009;48:276–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.archger.2008.02.004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Pardo RD, Winter DA, Deathe AB. System for routine assessment of walker-assisted Gait. Clin Biomech. 1993;8:73–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0268-0033(93)90036-h.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Kawate K, Ohneda Y, Tamai S. Three-dimensional measurement of pelvic rotation. In: Niwa S, Perren SM, Hattori T. (eds) Biomechanics in Orthopedics. Tokyo: Springer; 1992. p. 273–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-68216-5_19

  32. Khodadadi M, Baniasad MA, Arazpour M, Farahmand F, Zohoor H. Designing instrumented Walker to measure upper-extremity’s efforts: a case study. Assist Technol. 2019;31:267–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.2018.1442892.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Suica Z, Romkes J, Tal A, Maguire C. Walking with a four wheeled walker (rollator) significantly reduces EMG lower-limb muscle activity in healthy subjects. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2016;20(1):65–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbmt.2015.06.002.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Ko C-Y, Kim S-B, Chang Y, Choi H-J, Kang S, Heo Y, et al. Assessment of forearm and plantar foot load in the elderly using a four-wheeled Walker with armrest and the effect of armrest height. Clin Interv Aging. 2014;9:1759–65. https://doi.org/10.2147/cia.s70722.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Jain NB, Higgins LD, Katz JN, Garshick E. Association of shoulder pain with the use of mobility devices in persons with chronic spinal cord injury. PM R. 2010;2:896–900. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmrj.2010.05.004.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Stevens J, Beard C, O'fallon W, Kurland L. Conditions associated with carpal tunnel syndrome. Mayo Clin Proc. 1992;67:541–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0025-6196(12)60461-3.

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

Funding

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China [grant number 12072081 and 61761166002].

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Key Laboratory for Biomechanics and Mechanobiology of Ministry of Education, Beijing Advanced Innovation Centre for Biomedical Engineering, School of Biological Science and Medical Engineering, and with the School of Engineering Medicine, Beihang University, Beijing, 100191, China

    Jiemeng Yang, Yanyu Zhang, Run Ji, Chunjing Tao & Yubo Fan

  2. Key Laboratory of Human Motion Analysis and Rehabilitation Technology of the Ministry of Civil Affairs, Beijing Key Laboratory of Rehabilitation Technical Aids for Old-Age Disability, National Research Centre for Rehabilitation Technical Aids, Beijing, 100176, China

    Jiemeng Yang, Zhongjun Mo & Run Ji

Authors
  1. Jiemeng Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Zhongjun Mo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yanyu Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Run Ji
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Chunjing Tao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Yubo Fan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Y.F., C.T. Z.M., and J.Y. contributed to the conception or design of the study. J.Y., Y.Z., and R.J. contributed to acquisition and analysis of data. J.Y., R.J. and Z.M. drafted the manuscript. All authors reviewed and approved the manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Chunjing Tao or Yubo Fan.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Ethics approval was obtained from the Biological and Medical Ethics Committee of Beihang University (BM 20220211). All participants gave informed consent to take part in this study. All methods were performed in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yang, J., Mo, Z., Zhang, Y. et al. The effects of walking aids on shoulder joint kinematics in older persons: an initial study. BMC Geriatr 23, 743 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-023-04439-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-023-04439-3

Keywords

BMC Geriatrics

ISSN: 1471-2318

Contact us