| Author | Post |
|---|
plor
Instructor
|
Posted: Thu Jul 31st, 2008 12:22 pm |
|
Good point, on the older models of gaitkeeper treadmills you need to remember to move the controls back to prevent the actuator from using up some of the length of the belt; the newer models are actually designed to accomodate the litegait system over the full belt length.
|
nkarman
Instructor
| Joined: | Sat Jul 15th, 2006 |
| Location: | New York USA |
| Posts: | 12 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 31st, 2008 02:54 am |
|
| The actuator itself, and some of the treadmill supports (if there is a bar in the front) use up some of the lengtht of the TM. Some commercial treadmills (space-savers) are not long enough.
|
plor
Instructor
|
Posted: Mon Dec 11th, 2006 09:35 pm |
|
Curiously, those of us who are runners and live in northern climes often run on treadmills at least part of the time in the winter (like when it is icy everywhere)...are the gaitkeeper etc treadmills shorter than standard? (I don't think so.) Even large male people can run very quickly on treadmills (generally stride length increases a bit with speed) and have enough length........................
A typical issue with untrained runners is that they often "overstride" ie increase their stride length in an artificial [and inefficient] manner, usually by overreaching (forward) on the swing...remember when you are running quickly your body is often over or even ahead of your foot by the time it strikes...also when running v few runners have a heel strike per se, usually it is mid foot or even fore foot...when running you want to keep a cadence of at least 80 steps per minute..this is another v typical error: as speed increases overstriding is used rather than adequate cadence.....
http://www.wesleyboling.com/wp-content/photos/running.jpg
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/running/images/club_champs_05.jpg
http://www.bruendl.com/media/contentbilder/sommer/running_2.jpg
well, you get the idea...
plo'r
|
nkarman
Instructor
| Joined: | Sat Jul 15th, 2006 |
| Location: | New York USA |
| Posts: | 12 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 7th, 2006 11:23 pm |
|
| I knkow this topic has been up for a while, but I have just had some nice success using the Litegait to retrain running in a young woman with a cerebellar injury. The treadmill length is a critical issue. You also need to block the back wheels of the device to make sure that it doesn't creep backward (the flex yoke actually results in a bit of bouncing that allows the device to move backward).
|
WebKeeper
Administrator
| Joined: | Wed Jul 5th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 60 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 15th, 2006 03:23 pm |
|
| What is the stride length for a six foot tall adult? Since the location of the COM on the treadmill while in LITEGAIT does not change much, What would be the ideal available tread length running in LiteGait? Last edited on Sat Jul 15th, 2006 03:27 pm by WebKeeper
|
nkarman
Instructor
| Joined: | Sat Jul 15th, 2006 |
| Location: | New York USA |
| Posts: | 12 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 15th, 2006 06:01 am |
|
Remember that to run, the patient will need to take a longer stride with active pushoff with adequate power to achieve float- so the treadmill will need to be long enough to accommodate a really long stride without the foot falling off the back end. For tall clients, with large actuator, this can be a problem if you have a standard treadmill.
I would also do some training with BWS on takeoff & landing- adequate power to hop and to land on the impaired limb will be necessary to really run overground.
|
scombs
Instructor
| Joined: | Mon Jul 10th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 10th, 2006 06:35 pm |
|
Hello all, I hope I am posting correctly??
Ellen Miller and I did a single-subject design study a couple years ago with a 39 year old male post stroke. He was high functioning, could walk independently community distances with minimal deviations, but had been unable to return to running. Each time he attempted running overground he felt extremely unstable and uncoordinated. We trained using BWSTT 3 times per week with three 10 minute bouts each day. We ramped up the speed over the first couple minutes allowing him to set his pace as fast as he was able, maintained this about 7.5 minutes, then allowed 30 seconds or so to decrease speed. We started with 20% BWS (I think) and decreased support by 10% as his quality of running and endurance improved. Because we did not have the flexible yoke, once he achieved 0% BWS, we then decreased this further by setting the BWS while he was in half or full stride (instead of the typical double limb stance position) while standing on the treadmill. This seemed to decrease the BWS even further while in the lowest vertical positions during running. With the new flexible yoke this adjustment would be much easier and probably make running much more comfortable for the runner. Our participant achieved significantly improved overground running sprint velocity as well as improved single-limb balance and lower extremity strength. He also clinically improved his quality of life as measured with the Stroke Impact Scale. Interestingly his quality of running decreased (became less symmetrical), it seemed to us that he was able to figure out a movement pattern that worked for him within his mechanical constraints, although not the best quality. At our 6-month follow-up he was running 2 miles at a time 3 times per week and indicated a much improved outlook on his quality of life. Our participant told us that he really liked training with BWS b/c he felt safe to try to figure out "how to do it again." He was really pleased with the outcome!!
Please let me know if you have any further questions. I would be glad to help.
Stephanie Combs
Krannert School of Physical Therapy
University of Indianapolis
Last edited on Mon Jul 10th, 2006 07:06 pm by shanna
|
WebKeeper
Administrator
| Joined: | Wed Jul 5th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 60 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 8th, 2006 07:59 am |
|
I hope others share their experience, or lack there of, regarding running in LiteGait with the rest of us. Professor Miller and Combs from Indiana, did a case study some time back with running in LiteGait. They did so with the rigid LiteGait yoke which was designed mainly to prevent the kind of COM adjustment needed for running. They managed and got some good result. I will ask them to share their finding and opinion here. The need for control over the range of COM movement and the degree of flexibility is the reason for the new FlexAble Yoke design of LiteGait.
I believe with the right set of goals and the protocol to get there any of the LiteGaits with FlexAble yoke can play a big role in recovery of running function. The FlexAble yoke set to allow larger COM movement while providing different levels of support could accommodate running of TBI patient without compromising posture and safety and while reducing the disturbances to balance giving a chance to CNS to learn from practice.
|
grmoriello
Instructor
| Joined: | Fri Jul 7th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 7th, 2006 11:40 pm |
|
| I received a phone call today from a mother of a 16 y.o. male diagnosed with TBI (3 yr hx). The patient's goal is to resume running and they are interested in using the Lite Gait system in order to accomplish this goal. Any thoughts or advice?????
|
Current time is 01:56 am | |
|