Load carriage is a key component of hiking and military activity. The design of the load carriage
system (LCS) could influence performance and injury risk. This study aimed to compare a
traditional and a compliant LCS during walking and a step-up task to quantify differences in
oxygen consumption and trunk-pelvis kinematics. Fourteen ...
Load carriage is a key component of hiking and military activity. The design of the load carriage
system (LCS) could influence performance and injury risk. This study aimed to compare a
traditional and a compliant LCS during walking and a step-up task to quantify differences in
oxygen consumption and trunk-pelvis kinematics. Fourteen participants completed the tasks
whilst carrying 16kg in a rigid and a compliant LCS. There were no differences in oxygen
consumption between conditions during either task (p>0.05). There was significantly greater
trunk-pelvis axial rotation (p=0.041) and lateral flexion (p=0.001) range of motion when carrying
the compliant LCS during walking, and significantly greater trunk-pelvis lateral flexion range of
motion during the step-up task (p=0.003). Carrying 16kg in a compliant load carriage system
results in greater lateral flexion range of motion than a traditional, rigid system, without influencing
oxygen uptake.
Practitioner summary: Carrying 16kg in a compliant load carriage system during walking and a
step-up task allows greater lateral flexion range of motion than a traditional, rigid system without
influencing oxygen consumption.
