Affordable Access

Publisher Website

Influence of combat boot types on in-shoe forces and perceived comfort during unloaded and loaded walking.

Authors
  • Yeo, Eunice X S1
  • Chhabra, K2
  • Kong, P W3
  • 1 Physical Education and Sports Science Academic Group, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. , (Singapore)
  • 2 School of Chemical and Biomedical Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. , (Singapore)
  • 3 Physical Education and Sports Science Academic Group, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore [email protected]. , (Singapore)
Type
Published Article
Journal
BMJ military health
Publication Date
Jan 25, 2024
Volume
170
Issue
1
Pages
37–42
Identifiers
DOI: 10.1136/bmjmilitary-2021-002061
PMID: 35296550
Source
Medline
Keywords
Language
English
License
Unknown

Abstract

Combat boots are essential protective gear for military personnel. The purposes of the present study were to examine (1) the influence of combat boot type on ground reaction force (GRF) variables and perceived comfort during unloaded and loaded walking and (2) the relationship between comfort and biomechanical measurements. Four types of combat boots with different physical features (eg, mass, thickness) and mechanical properties (eg, cushioning, rigidity) were compared across 61 male participants with experience in military marching while carrying heavy loads. In each boot type, participants completed a 10-m walk under an unloaded and a 20-kg loaded conditions at their preferred speeds. Peak force and loading rate during walking were measured using the loadsol wireless in-shoe sensor system. Comfort level was assessed using a 7-point Likert scale. Difference between loaded and unloaded walking, and across boot types were statistically compared. Correlation analyses were performed between comfort and GRF variables. On average across all boot types, participants walked 2.1% slower when carrying 20-kg loads while experiencing 24.3% higher peak force and 20.8% higher loading rate. Boot D was perceived as most comfortable, followed by boots C, B and A (χ2(2)=115.4, p<0.001). Participants walked slightly faster (p=0.022, ηp 2 = 0.052) and displayed higher loading rates (p<0.001, ηp 2=0.194) in the two more comfortable boots (C and D) than the less comfortable boots (A and B). No significant correlations were found between perceived comfort and any GRF variables. Combat boot features can influence perceived comfort ratings substantially during walking, whereas biomechanical differences among boot types are more subtle regardless of load conditions. The lack of relationship between comfort and force variables suggests that both subjective and objective measurements should be considered for comprehensive evaluation of combat boots. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Report this publication

Statistics

Seen <100 times