↓ Skip to main content

Biomechanical walking mechanisms underlying the metabolic reduction caused by an autonomous exoskeleton

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
166 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
415 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Biomechanical walking mechanisms underlying the metabolic reduction caused by an autonomous exoskeleton
Published in
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12984-016-0111-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Luke M. Mooney, Hugh M. Herr

Abstract

Ankle exoskeletons can now reduce the metabolic cost of walking in humans without leg disability, but the biomechanical mechanisms that underlie this augmentation are not fully understood. In this study, we analyze the energetics and lower limb mechanics of human study participants walking with and without an active autonomous ankle exoskeleton previously shown to reduce the metabolic cost of walking. We measured the metabolic, kinetic and kinematic effects of wearing a battery powered bilateral ankle exoskeleton. Six participants walked on a level treadmill at 1.4 m/s under three conditions: exoskeleton not worn, exoskeleton worn in a powered-on state, and exoskeleton worn in a powered-off state. Metabolic rates were measured with a portable pulmonary gas exchange unit, body marker positions with a motion capture system, and ground reaction forces with a force-plate instrumented treadmill. Inverse dynamics were then used to estimate ankle, knee and hip torques and mechanical powers. The active ankle exoskeleton provided a mean positive power of 0.105 ± 0.008 W/kg per leg during the push-off region of stance phase. The net metabolic cost of walking with the active exoskeleton (3.28 ± 0.10 W/kg) was an 11 ± 4 % (p = 0.019) reduction compared to the cost of walking without the exoskeleton (3.71 ± 0.14 W/kg). Wearing the ankle exoskeleton significantly reduced the mean positive power of the ankle joint by 0.033 ± 0.006 W/kg (p = 0.007), the knee joint by 0.042 ± 0.015 W/kg (p = 0.020), and the hip joint by 0.034 ± 0.009 W/kg (p = 0.006). This study shows that the ankle exoskeleton does not exclusively reduce positive mechanical power at the ankle joint, but also mitigates positive power at the knee and hip. Furthermore, the active ankle exoskeleton did not simply replace biological ankle function in walking, but rather augmented the total (biological + exoskeletal) ankle moment and power. This study underscores the need for comprehensive models of human-exoskeleton interaction and global optimization methods for the discovery of new control strategies that optimize the physiological impact of leg exoskeletons.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 415 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 412 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 96 23%
Student > Master 80 19%
Researcher 33 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 29 7%
Student > Bachelor 28 7%
Other 67 16%
Unknown 82 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 226 54%
Sports and Recreations 15 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 3%
Computer Science 8 2%
Other 41 10%
Unknown 100 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 May 2018.
All research outputs
#14,834,028
of 22,842,950 outputs
Outputs from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#780
of 1,279 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#221,016
of 396,721 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#15
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,842,950 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,279 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 396,721 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.