JMERC
Owner
Janbazan Medical and Engineering Research Center (JMERC) is the owner of IJWPH.
1.0
Cite Score 2025
SJR: 0.129 / SNIP: 0.140
Volume 18, Issue 3 (2026)
Iran J War Public Health 2026, 18(3): 1001-1023 |
Back to browse issues page
Article Type:
Subject:
Ethics code: IR.UMA.REC.1401.581
History
Received: 2026/07/3 | Accepted: 2026/08/29 | Published: 2026/09/6
Received: 2026/07/3 | Accepted: 2026/08/29 | Published: 2026/09/6
How to cite this article
Barzegarfar L, Barghamadi M, Piri E. Comparison of Lower-Limb Muscle Electromyographic Mean Frequency between Runners with Normal and Pronated Foot Postures during Walking in Carbon-Plated Footwear. , Iran J War Public Health. 2026; 18 (3) :1001-1023
URL: http://ijwph.ir/article-1-1853-en.html
URL: http://ijwph.ir/article-1-1853-en.html
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Rights and permissions
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Abstract (266 Views)
Background: Differences in foot posture may be associated with differences in lower-limb biomechanics and neuromuscular function during walking. However, evidence regarding differences in the frequency-domain characteristics of lower-limb muscle activity between runners with pronated and normal foot postures remains limited, particularly under standardized carbon-plated footwear conditions.
Methods: This cross-sectional, between-group laboratory comparison included 30 recreational male runners aged 18–30 years who were classified into pronated-foot (n = 15) and normal-foot (n = 15) groups based on the Foot Posture Index-6. All participants walked at 1.3 m/s while wearing the same carbon-plated footwear. Surface EMG was recorded from eight lower-limb muscles, and MNF was calculated for the loading response, mid-stance, and push-off phases. Between-group differences in MNF were analyzed using independent-samples t-tests, with Cohen’s d calculated as an effect-size measure.
Results: The pronated-foot group demonstrated higher MNF than the normal-foot group in the VM (p = 0.001, d = 0.839), ST (p = 0.001, d = 0.834), and BF (p = 0.001, d = 0.754) during loading response; in the GM during mid-stance (p = 0.001, d = 1.117); and in the MG (p = 0.001, d = 1.024) and GM (p = 0.001, d = 1.118) during push-off. No significant between-group differences were observed for the remaining muscle-phase comparisons.
Conclusion: Runners with a pronated foot posture exhibited phase- and muscle-specific differences in EMG-MNF compared with runners with a normal foot posture while walking in standardized carbon-plated footwear.
Methods: This cross-sectional, between-group laboratory comparison included 30 recreational male runners aged 18–30 years who were classified into pronated-foot (n = 15) and normal-foot (n = 15) groups based on the Foot Posture Index-6. All participants walked at 1.3 m/s while wearing the same carbon-plated footwear. Surface EMG was recorded from eight lower-limb muscles, and MNF was calculated for the loading response, mid-stance, and push-off phases. Between-group differences in MNF were analyzed using independent-samples t-tests, with Cohen’s d calculated as an effect-size measure.
Results: The pronated-foot group demonstrated higher MNF than the normal-foot group in the VM (p = 0.001, d = 0.839), ST (p = 0.001, d = 0.834), and BF (p = 0.001, d = 0.754) during loading response; in the GM during mid-stance (p = 0.001, d = 1.117); and in the MG (p = 0.001, d = 1.024) and GM (p = 0.001, d = 1.118) during push-off. No significant between-group differences were observed for the remaining muscle-phase comparisons.
Conclusion: Runners with a pronated foot posture exhibited phase- and muscle-specific differences in EMG-MNF compared with runners with a normal foot posture while walking in standardized carbon-plated footwear.
Send email to the article author