Observational analysis reveals similar foot joint loading in single leg drops and heel-strike running, indicating visual focus is not influential.
Introduction Understanding foot joint loading during different dynamic activities is essential information for guiding exercise progression in rehabilitation. While walking and running biomechanics are well studied, joint‐specific kinetic data during a single leg drop and hop task, often used in rehabilitation, are lacking. This study aimed to evaluate (1) the kinetic behavior of the ankle, Chopart, Lisfranc, and MTP‐1 joints during a drop‐hop task under different visual constraints and (2) to contextualize these findings by comparing them with heel‐strike running, to assess the relative loading demands of the drop‐hop task. Methods Seventeen recreationally active male adults performed a single‐leg drop and hop under two visual focus conditions: central (focusing on the landing spot) and peripheral (focusing straight ahead). Kinematics, moments, and power were analyzed using a four‐segment foot model with statistical parametric mapping. Additionally, peak plantarflexion moments and power outputs were compared with existing data from heel‐strike running data from a mixed‐sex sample (4 males, 3 females) collected in a separate study using the same setup. Results Findings revealed no differences between central and peripheral focus conditions. Heel‐strike running shows similar joint loading, but higher power generation ( p < 0.001) at the ankle and Chopart joint, higher absorption ( p < 0.001) at the Chopart and MTP‐1 ( p < 0.05) joint and lower power absorption ( p < 0.001) at the ankle and Lisfranc joint. Conclusion Visual input does not influence foot biomechanics during a single‐leg drop and hop. This task produces similar joint loading patterns similar to heel‐strike running but with reduced power generation at the ankle and midfoot. Contrary to global belief, the single leg drop‐hop task is not excessively more demanding in terms of foot joint loading, supporting the earlier use of drop‐hop exercises in rehabilitation programs. They offer a controlled way to reintroduce loading while avoiding the full propulsion demands of running, independent of visual focus.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Haelewijn et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: