Kinetic and Kinematic Analysis of Gait Termination: A Comparison between Planned and Unplanned Conditions

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

 

1. Abstract: It requires revision to address the purpose, methodology, results, conclusions, and comparative analysis with numerical data and ratios.

2. Introduction: It needs to be enriched with updated information.

3. Methodology: It should be supplemented with relevant figures and diagrams, effectively illustrating the approach employed.

4. Results and Discussion: More extensive elaboration is needed, including the reasons behind the obtained results. Additionally, the paper lacks a comparison of the work with other researchers' studies.

5. Conclusions: It should be presented in a separate paragraph, highlighting key findings in clear and distinct bullet points.

 

1. Abstract: It requires revision to address the purpose, methodology, results, conclusions, and comparative analysis with numerical data and ratios.

2. Introduction: It needs to be enriched with updated information.

3. Methodology: It should be supplemented with relevant figures and diagrams, effectively illustrating the approach employed.

4. Results and Discussion: More extensive elaboration is needed, including the reasons behind the obtained results. Additionally, the paper lacks a comparison of the work with other researchers' studies.

5. Conclusions: It should be presented in a separate paragraph, highlighting key findings in clear and distinct bullet points.

Author Response

Thank you for the reviewer’s comment. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

This is a very nice study which provides exploration of a relevant clinical topic. In addition, the writing style in English was very good with appropriate grammar.  However,  there are a few suggested technical additions which could help the authors provide a stronger presentation of outcomes. 

1. Study design was good however it may help to provide results of a power analysis to support findings given the small sample size.  Please see the attached document with comments. 

2. There needs to be more clarification as to why the sample rate is only 100Hz given the possible sudden stops including in the motion capture. Other suggested protocols use 200Hz. 

3.  The paper includes a very good reference list however the format needs to be reviewed and possibly revised to a more appropriate format. 

4. Figure #2 has some unidentified symbols included in the caption which should be clarified or deleted. 

Given the above items needing to be addressed, the project was still very good. Thanks for your sharing your research. 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thank you for the reviewer’s comment. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The objective of this study was to investigate the biomechanical differences between planned gait termination (PGT) and unplanned gait termination (UGT), in order to develop therapeutic interventions for individuals experiencing difficulty with gait termination. The study analyzed the spatiotemporal, kinematic, and kinetic data of 20 healthy adults using a six-infrared camera motion analysis system and force plates. Significant differences were found in gait termination time and step length between PGT and UGT. Ankle range of motion showed significant differences in phase 1, and significant differences were observed in hip, knee, and ankle ROM between the conditions in phase 2. In phase 3, UGT showed reduced hip ROM but increased knee ROM and kinetic parameters compared to PGT. The study suggests that during PGT, the ankle joint primarily contributes to deceleration, while UGT reveals disrupted kinesthetic control leading to a preference for a hip and knee strategy to absorb force and control the center of mass. These findings provide valuable insights into the biomechanical mechanisms underlying body stability during gait termination.

The study is well-designed and the results are clearly presented. However, it would be helpful to provide more information on the methods selection. Overall, this study provides valuable insights into the management of gait termination.

 

Abstract

L38: Considering that 3 phases are mentioned in the results section of the abstract, it should be mentioned in the method section of the abstract that gait termination is analyzed in 3 phases.

 

Introduction

L69-70: The sentence implies that ground reaction forces are a separate variable from kinetics. However, ground reaction forces are actually one of the kinetic variables.

L79-80: In the methods section, you stated that gait termination was analyzed in three phases. However, in the sentence you provided, only two phases are mentioned: the pre-stopping and stopping phases of the leading limb.

Methods

L88-92: Please combine the first sentence of the paragraph with the provided demographic information of the subjects. It is suggested to amend the sentence as follows. "Twenty healthy adults (ten males and ten females; mean age: 23.95 ± 2.56 years; mean height: 168.91 ± 8.44 cm; mean weight: 64.55 ± 12.95 kg; mean leg length: 86.55 ± 4.54 cm) were recruited for the study."

L125-126: The sentence has a couple of mistakes. Did the subject attach a marker to his body or was EMG used?

L131-132: For this sentence “These trials were conducted for gait analysis and to calculate 131 the %RVC in the gait termination condition.” What is the %RVC? Please provide the appropriate reference for this sentence.

L133-135: Please provide the appropriate reference for this sentence.

L138-139: This sentence " In the PGT condition, the participants were asked to stop with the leading limb on a second force plate, bring their trailing limbs parallel " was given in the previous paragraph. Correct the sentence.

L140: You mentioned in this sentence that they were asked not to slow down their gait before reaching the force plate, while for gait termination, the speed of walking should be reduced. Please provide the appropriate reference for this sentence.

L141: How was the gait speed controlled?

L143-145: In this situation, the participant knew that they had to stand on the first force plate. How do you justify the unplanned gait termination?

L152-153: Please provide the appropriate reference for this sentence.

Data analysis: It is suggested that the different phases of gait termination in this study be presented schematically.

L187-189: Please provide an appropriate reference for the p-value threshold of less than 0.017 mentioned in the sentence, "Bonferroni-adjusted post-hoc Wilcoxon signed-ranks tests were used to compare individual pairs of conditions, and a p-value of less than 0.017 was considered statistically significant."

Results

The results section is well-written.

discussion

The discussion section provides a lot of valuable information. However, it is very lengthy, making it difficult to establish connections between the different points. Please consider shortening the discussion section.

Comments for author File: Comments.docx

Author Response

Thank you for the reviewer’s comment. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Thank you very much for your great effort to make the paper improved.

I have no further comment on this paper.