Skip to main content
Log in

Gait in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: energy cost analysis

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Spine Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Walking is a very common activity for the human body. It is so common that the musculoskeletal and cardiovascular systems are optimized to have the minimum energetic cost at 4 km/h (spontaneous speed). A previous study showed that lumbar and thoracolumbar adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients exhibit a reduction of shoulder, pelvic, and hip frontal mobility during gait. A longer contraction duration of the spinal and pelvic muscles was also noted. The energetic cost (C) of walking is normally linked to the actual mechanical work muscles have to perform. This total mechanical work (W tot) can be divided in two parts: the work needed to move the shoulders and lower limbs relative to the center of mass of the body (COMb) is known as the internal work (W int), whereas additional work, known as external work (W ext), is needed to accelerate and lift up the COMb relative to the ground. Normally, the COMb goes up and down by 3 cm with every step. Pathological walking usually leads to an increase in W tot (often because of increased vertical displacement of the COMb), and consequently, it increases the energetic cost. The goal of this study is to investigate the effects of scoliosis and scoliosis severity on the mechanical work and energetic cost of walking. Fifty-four female subjects aged 12 to 17 were used in this study. Thirteen healthy girls were in the control group, 12 were in scoliosis group 1 (Cobb angle [Cb] ≤ 20°), 13 were in scoliosis group 2 (20° < Cb < 40°), and 16 were in scoliosis group 3 (Cb ≥ 40°). They were assessed by physical examination and gait analysis. The 41 scoliotic patients had an untreated progressive left thoracolumbar or lumbar AIS. During gait analysis, the subject was asked to walk on a treadmill at 4 km h−1. Movements of the limbs were followed by six infrared cameras, which tracked markers fixed on the body. W int was calculated from the kinematics. The movements of the COMb were derived from the ground reaction forces, and W ext was calculated from the force signal. W tot was equal to W int + W ext. Oxygen consumption \( \left( {\dot{V}{\text{O}}_{2} } \right) \) was measured with a mask to calculate energetic cost (C) and muscular efficiency (W tot/C). Statistical comparisons between the groups were performed using an analysis of variance (ANOVA). The external work (W ext) and internal work (W int) were both reduced from 7 to 22% as a function of the severity of the scoliosis curve. Overall, the total muscular mechanical work (W tot) was reduced from 7% to 13% in the scoliosis patients. Within scoliosis groups, the W ext for the group 1 (Cb ≥ 20°) and 2 (20 ≤ Cb ≤ 40°) was significantly different from group 3 (Cb ≥ 40°). No significant differences were observed between scoliosis groups for the W int. The W tot did not showed any significant difference between scoliosis groups except between group 1 and 3. The energy cost and \( \dot{V}{\text{O}}_{2} \) were increased by around 30%. As a result Muscle efficiency was significantly decreased by 23% to 32%, but no significant differences related to the severity of the scoliosis were noted. This study shows that scoliosis patients have inefficient muscles during walking. Muscle efficiency was so severely decreased that it could be used as a diagnostic tool, since every scoliosis patient had an average muscle efficiency below 27%, whereas every control had an average muscle efficiency above 27%. The reduction of mechanical work found in scoliotic patients has never been observed in any pathological gait, but it is interpreted as a long term adaptation to economize energy and face poor muscle efficiency. With a relatively stiff gait, scoliosis patients also limit vertical movement of the COMb (smoothing the gait) and consequently, reduce W ext and W int. Inefficiency of scoliosis muscles was obvious even in mild scoliosis (group 1, Cb < 20°) and could be related to the prolonged muscle contraction time observed in a previous study (muscle co-contraction).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Barrios C, Perez-Encinas C, Maruenda JI, Laguia M (2005) Significant ventilatory functional restriction in adolescents with mild or moderate scoliosis during maximal exercise tolerance test. Spine 30:1610–1615

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Biewener AA, Farley CT, Roberts TJ, Temaner M (2004) Muscle mechanical advantage of human walking and running: implications for energy cost. J Appl Physiol 97:2266–2274

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Cavagna GA (1975) Force platforms as ergometers. J Appl Physiol 39:174–179

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Cavagna GA, Kaneko M (1977) Mechanical work and efficiency in level walking and running. J Physiol 268:467–481

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Cavagna GA, Thys H, Zamboni A (1976) The sources of external work in level walking and running. J Physiol 262:639–657

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Cavagna GA, Willems PA, Legramandi MA, Heglund NC (2002) Pendular energy transduction within the step in human walking. J Exp Biol 205:3413–3422

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Cobb J (1948) Outline for study of scoliosis. Am Acad Orthop Surg 5:261–275

    Google Scholar 

  8. Corcoran PJ, Brengelmann GL (1970) Oxygen uptake in normal and handicapped subjects, in relation to speed of waing beside velocity-controlled cart. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 51:78–87

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Della Croce U, Riley PO, Lelas JL, Kerrigan DC (2001) A refined view of the determinants of gait. Gait Posture 14:79–84

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Detrembleur C, Dierick F, Stoquart G, Chantraine F, Lejeune T (2003) Energy cost, mechanical work, and efficiency of hemiparetic walking. Gait Posture 18:47–55

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Detrembleur C, van den Hecke A, Dierick F (2000) Motion of the body centre of gravity as a summary indicator of the mechanics of human pathological gait. Gait Posture 12:243–250

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Detrembleur C, Vanmarsenille JM, De Cuyper F, Dierick F (2005) Relationship between energy cost, gait speed, vertical displacement of centre of body mass and efficiency of pendulum-like mechanism in unilateral amputee gait. Gait Posture 21:333–340

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Dierick F, Lefebvre C, van den Hecke A, Detrembleur C (2004) Development of displacement of centre of mass during independent walking in children. Dev Med Child Neurol 46:533–539

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Dierick F, Penta M, Renaut D, Detrembleur C (2004) A force measuring treadmill in clinical gait analysis. Gait Posture 20:299–303

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Kavouras SA, Sarras SE, Tsekouras YE, Sidossis LS (2008) Assessment of energy expenditure in children using the RT3 accelerometer. J Sports Sci 26:959–966

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kerrigan DC, Thirunarayan MA, Sheffler LR, Ribaudo TA, Corcoran PJ (1996) A tool to assess biomechanical gait efficiency; a preliminary clinical study. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 75:3–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Kerrigan DC, Viramontes BE, Corcoran PJ, LaRaia PJ (1995) Measured versus predicted vertical displacement of the sacrum during gait as a tool to measure biomechanical gait performance. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 74:3–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Lejeune TM, Willems PA, Heglund NC (1998) Mechanics and energetics of human locomotion on sand. J Exp Biol 201:2071–2080

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Lenke LG, Betz RR, Harms J, Bridwell KH, Clements DH, Lowe TG, Blanke K (2001) Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a new classification to determine extent of spinal arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 83-A:1169–1181

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Mahaudens P, Banse X, Detrembleur C (2008) Effects of short-term brace wearing on the pendulum-like mechanism of walking in healthy subjects. Gait Posture 28 (4):703–707

    Google Scholar 

  21. Mahaudens P, Banse X, Mousny M, Detrembleur C (2009) Gait in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: kinematics and electromyographic analysis. Eur Spine J 18(4):512–521

    Google Scholar 

  22. Massaad F, Dierick F, van den Hecke A, Detrembleur C (2004) Influence of gait pattern on the body’s centre of mass displacement in children with cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol 46:674–680

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. McArdle WD, Katch FI, Katch VL (1996) Exercise physiology: energy, nutrition, and human performance, 4th edn. Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  24. McNeill Alexander R (2002) Energetics and optimization of human walking and running: the 2000 Raymond Pearl memorial lecture. Am J Hum Biol 14:641–648

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Monod H, Flandrois R (2003) Physiologie du sport. Bases physiologiques des activités physiques et sportives. Paris

  26. Saunders JB, Inman VT, Eberhart HD (1953) The major determinants in normal and pathological gait. J Bone Joint Surg Am 35-A:543–558

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Stoquart GG, Detrembleur C, Nielens H, Lejeune TM (2005) Efficiency of work production by spastic muscles. Gait Posture 22:331–337

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Tesio L, Lanzi D, Detrembleur C (1998) The 3-D motion of the centre of gravity of the human body during level walking. II. Lower limb amputees. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 13:83–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. van den Hecke A, Malghem C, Renders A, Detrembleur C, Palumbo S, Lejeune TM (2007) Mechanical work, energetic cost, and gait efficiency in children with cerebral palsy. J Pediatr Orthop 27:643–647

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Waters RL, Barnes G, Husserl T, Silver L, Liss R (1988) Comparable energy expenditure after arthrodesis of the hip and ankle. J Bone Joint Surg Am 70:1032–1037

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Waters RL, Campbell J, Thomas L, Hugos L, Davis P (1982) Energy costs of walking in lower-extremity plaster casts. J Bone Joint Surg Am 64:896–899

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Waters RL, Hislop HJ, Thomas L, Campbell J (1983) Energy cost of walking in normal children and teenagers. Dev Med Child Neurol 25:184–188

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Waters RL, Lunsford BR (1985) Energy cost of paraplegic locomotion. J Bone Joint Surg Am 67:1245–1250

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Waters RL, Mulroy S (1999) The energy expenditure of normal and pathologic gait. Gait Posture 9:207–231

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Willems PA, Cavagna GA, Heglund NC (1995) External, internal and total work in human locomotion. J Exp Biol 198:379–393

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

This work was supported by the Orthopedie Van Haesendonk firm.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. Mahaudens.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mahaudens, P., Detrembleur, C., Mousny, M. et al. Gait in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: energy cost analysis. Eur Spine J 18, 1160–1168 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-009-1002-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-009-1002-0

Keywords

Navigation