## 4 Discussion
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Study Variables** & **’No Load’** & **’Load 1’** & **’Load 2’** & **’Load 3’** & **Main Effect** \\ \hline
**Temporal Gait Parameters** & **Mean (SD)** & **Mean (SD)** & **Mean (SD)** & **Mean (SD)** & **\(F\) (\(p\)-Value)** & \(\eta^{2}\) \\ \hline Step time-L (s) & 0.55 (0.04) & 0.54 (0.04) & 0.54 (0.04) & 0.53 (0.04) & **3.073 (0.028)** & **0.028** \\ \hline Step time-R (s) & 0.55 (0.04) & 0.55 (0.06) & 0.55 (0.05) & 0.54 (0.04) & 1.702 (0.167) & 0.016 \\ \hline Stride time (s) & 1.11 (0.08) & 1.09 (0.09) & 1.09 (0.09) & 1.07 (0.08) & 2.431 (0.065) & 0.022 \\ \hline Cadence (steps/min) & 108.6 (7.7) & 110.8 (7.8) & 111.1 (8.4) & 112.4 (8.1) & **3.191 (0.024)** & **0.029** \\ \hline Gait speed (m/s) & 4.44 (0.48) & 4.57 (0.53) & 4.59 (0.57) & 4.66 (0.58) & 2.423 (0.066) & 0.022 \\ \hline Stance phase-L (\%) & 62.1 (2.1) & 62.3 (1.9) & 62.7 (1.8) & 62.8 (1.9) & **2.694 (0.046)** & **0.024** \\ \hline Stance phase-R (\%) & 62.3 (1.7) & 61.6 (3.1) & 62.5 (1.9) & 62.5 (1.9) & **3.378 (0.019)** & **0.030** \\ \hline Load response-L (\%) & 12.3 (1.5) & 11.8 (1.6) & 12.4 (1.9) & 12.6 (1.5) & **2.729 (0.044)** & **0.025** \\ \hline Load response-R (\%) & 12.0 (1.9) & 12.1 (1.5) & 12.7 (2.0) & 12.7 (2.2) & **2.943 (0.033)** & **0.027** \\ \hline Mid stance-L (\%) & 37.8 (1.7) & 38.4 (3.0) & 37.7 (2.3) & 37.5 (2.1) & 1.827 (0.142) & 0.017 \\ \hline Mid stance-R (\%) & 37.5 (3.9) & 37.5 (2.0) & 37.2 (2.0) & 37.2 (2.0) & 0.311 (0.817) & 0.003 \\ \hline Pre-swing-L (\%) & 12.1 (1.9) & 12.3 (1.6) & 12.5 (2.0) & 12.7 (2.1) & 1.686 (0.170) & 0.015 \\ \hline Pre-swing-R (\%) & 12.3 (1.5) & 12.2 (2.0) & 12.9 (1.8) & 12.7 (1.4) & **2.909 (0.035)** & **0.026** \\ \hline Swing phase-L (\%) & 37.9 (2.1) & 37.6 (1.5) & 37.3 (1.8) & 37.2 (1.9) & **2.688 (0.047)** & **0.024** \\ \hline Swing phase-R (\%) & 37.7 (1.7) & 38.3 (2.9) & 37.5 (1.9) & 375 (1.9) & **2.681 (0.047)** & **0.024** \\ \hline Double stance phase (\%) & 24.8 (4.6) & 24.3 (2.7) & 25.4 (2.8) & 255 (3.0) & 2.132 (0.096) & 0.019 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} \(p<0.05\).  
\end{table} 
Table 2: Changes in temporal gait parameters under the different loading conditions. suggest that spatial gait parameters are uninterrupted by carrying heavier loads due to their robustness to external mass [11]. We found that heavier loads carried by intervention police decreased the step time of the left foot, swing phase of both feet and increased cadence, stance phase, and load response of both feet, which is not in line with previous studies [12; 13; 17; 20; 25; 28]. Specifically, evidence suggests non-existing effects between carrying heavy loads and temporal gait parameters, such as gait speed [12; 20; 25], cadence [12; 28], or double and single support time [12], even after applying different loading strategies of backpack/backpack and armor loads [12; 13; 17], 8 kg webbing [28], vest or body armor loads [20; 28] and a rifle [12; 13; 17]. Although the majority of the studies found no significant effects of heavy loads on temporal parameters [12; 13; 17; 20; 25; 28], some studies have demonstrated an increase in stance phase and double support time with external loads [20], an increase in cadence and double support time when walking uphill or downhill [29] and an increase in mid stance time [12]. These increases in different gait phases are often explained by generating greater vertical and horizontal ground impulses to overcome the added inertial of the external load [11]. It should be highlighted that the participants in studies reporting increases in different gait phases have been instructed to walk at self-selected speeds [12; 20], as opposed to treadmill walking [13; 17] or running [28]. When walking speeds are self-regulated, it is possible that the time spent in different gait phases is altered and, therefore, increased to accommodate the load, while similar scenarios on a treadmill with pre-determined gait speed may alternatively mask these changes [11].