Estep-Knowledge Application Essay

A fascinating issue in the area of running biomechanics is the role that variability
plays within human gait. Defined as the inherent variations that occur in human
movement across repetitions of the same task,7 variability has been viewed in different
ways. Traditionally, increased variability has been viewed as a negative aspect of human
movement and considered to be error or noise. Less variability was associated with
stability and mastery of a task.5,6 However, the incorporation of dynamic systems theory
and optimal variability theory, into how movement is studied, has changed the way
variability is viewed. According to dynamic systems theory, a certain amount of
variability is a necessity to maintain normal function. Variability represents flexibility and
adaptability to a changing environment and allows for the same task to be completed in
multiple ways.2 The ability to complete the same task in multiple ways is suggested to
decrease repeated stress placed on the body.1 Optimal variability theory states than an
ideal amount of variability exists and deviating away from this value represents
pathology. Whether increased or decreased variability is associated with pathology is
dependent on the task.2
Variability is measured using both linear and non-linear methods. Using linear
measures, such as standard deviation, range and coefficient of variation, data is averaged
together and a mean picture of movement is generated. Linear measures quantify the
magnitude of variability. In contrast, non-linear measures of variability provide insight
into the structure and evolution of variability over time. In dynamic movements, such as
walking and running, the evolution of variability over an entire time series can provide
useful information on the bodys adaptability and flexibility to a changing environment.2

Estep-Knowledge Application Essay

Decreased variability in lower extremity biomechanics has been demonstrated in
individuals experiencing a running injury. Runners with patellofemoral joint pain
demonstrated decreased joint coupling variability for thigh flexion/extension and tibial
rotation, thigh abduction/adduction and tibial rotation, tibial rotation and foot
inversion/eversion and femoral rotation and tibial rotation.1,3 Runners with a history of
iliotibial band syndrome showed decreased variability for thigh adduction/abduction and
foot inversion/eversion joint coupling.4
While lower extremity biomechanics variability in uninjured individuals has been
compared to individuals currently experiencing an injury or have a history of running
injury, little research has been conducted assessing the variability demonstrated while
walking and running. This gap in the literature has led me to my first study investigating
the variability observed during walking and running in healthy subjects using both linear
and non-linear methods. Results from the linear analysis showed that running
demonstrated more variability than walking only in knee flexion. Knee abduction, knee
internal rotation, hip flexion, hip adduction and hip internal rotation variability were all
comparable between walking and running. Using non-linear analysis, running
consistently demonstrated greater variability than walking for all variables. A future study
will examine the patterns of variability observed in subjects experiencing a specific type
of running injury, leading to a final study in which an intervention targeting abnormal gait
kinematics will be implemented. Pre and post-intervention variability will be
investigated.
References
1. Hamill J, van Emmerik RE, Heiderscheit BC, Li L. A dynamical systems approach to
lower extremity running injuries. Clin Biomech Bristol Avon. 1999;14(5):297-308.

Estep-Knowledge Application Essay

2. Harbourne RT, Stergiou N. Movement variability and the use of nonlinear tools:
principles to guide physical therapist practice. Phys Ther. 2009;89(3):267-282.
3. Heiderscheit BC. Variability of stride characteristics and joint coordination among
indviduals with unilateral patellofemoral pain. J Appl Biomech. 2002;18:110-121.
4. Miller R, Meardon S, Derrick T, Gillette J. Continuous relative phase variability
during an exhaustive run in runner with a history of iliotibial band syndrome. J Appl
Biomech. 2008;24(3):262-270.
5. Schmidt RA. Motor Schema Theory After 27 Years: Reflections and Implications for
a New Theory. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2003;74(4):366-375.
6. Schmidt R, Lee T. Motor Control and Learning: A Behavioral Emphasis. 5th ed.
Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 2011.
7. Stergiou N, Harbourne RT, Cavanaugh JT. Optimal Movement Variability: A New
Theoretical Perspective for Neurologic Physical Therapy. J Neurol Phys Ther.
2006;30(3):120-129.