Running in highly cushioned shoes increases leg stiffness and amplifies impact loading

Effect of midsole hardness and surface type cushioning on landing impact in heel-strike runners

High loading impact associated with heel strikes causes running injuries. This study aimed to investigate how loading impact is affected by midsole hardness and running surface type. Twelve young rear-foot runners ran at a fixed speed along an 18 m runway wearing shoes with different midsole hardness (Asker C-45, C-50, C-55, C-60, from soft to hard) and on two different surfaces (rubber and concrete). We quantified vertical average loading rate (VALR) and vertical impact peak force (VIPF). We conducted midsole × surface repeated-measures ANOVA on loading impact measures, and one-sample t-tests to compare VALR with a threshold value (80 BW·s-1). Midsole hardness and surface type mainly affected VALR. Although no significant effect of these variables was observed for VIPF magnitude, there were effects on time to VIPF and steps with VIPF. Several combinations of midsole and surface hardness reduced VALR below 80 BW·s-1: Asker C-45 with both surfaces, and Asker C-50 with a rubber surface. The combination of softer midsole and surface effectively reduced loading rates as shown by increased time to VIPF and reduced VALR. Combining softer midsole and surface results in the greatest cushioning, which demonstrates the benefit of considering both factors in reducing running injuries.

Maximalist Shoes: Separating Science From Hype

One of the most discussed but misunderstood topics in foot and ankle is shoe wear choices and the purported benefits of each type of shoe versus their actual scientific advantages. All foot and ankle care providers should be familiar with the various shoe wear types available to patients to improve their overall foot health. Recently, mainstream popularity and media coverage of maximalist shoes has created increased interest in the science and potential clinical benefits of maximalist shoes. The purpose of this review is to present the current biomechanical evidence of maximalist shoes and to help inform the foot and ankle community of their potential therapeutic applications.Levels of Evidence: Level V.

The Impact of Excessive Body Weight and Foot Pronation on Running Kinetics: A Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND

Running exercise is an effective means to enhance cardiorespiratory fitness and body composition. Besides these health benefits, running is also associated with musculoskeletal injuries that can be more prevalent in individuals with excessive body weight. Little is known regarding the specific effects of overweight and foot pronation on ground reaction force distribution during running. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the effects of overweight/obesity and foot pronation on running kinetics.

METHODS

Eighty-four young adults were allocated to four experimental groups: non-excessive body weight/non-pronated feet; non-excessive body weight/pronated feet; overweight or obesity/ non-pronated feet and overweight or obesity/pronated feet. Biomechanical testing included participants to run at ~ 3.2 m/s over an 18-m walkway with an embedded force plate at its midpoint. Three-dimensional ground reaction forces were recorded and normalized to body mass to evaluate running kinetics from 20 running trials. Test-re-test reliability for running speed data demonstrated ICC > 0.94 for each group and in total.

RESULTS

The results indicated significantly lower vertical impact peak forces (p = 0.001, effect size = 0.12), shorter time to reach the vertical impact peak (p = 0.006, effect size = 0.08) and reduced vertical loading rate (p = 0.0007, effect size = 0.13) in individuals with excessive body weight (overweight or obesity/non-pronated feet group and overweight or obesity/pronated feet) compared with individuals non-excessive body weight (non-excessive body weight/non-pronated feet and non-excessive body weight/pronated feet). Moreover, the excessive body weight groups presented lower peak braking (p = 0.01, effect size = 0.06) and propulsion forces (p = 0.003, effect size = 0.09), lower medio-lateral loading rate (p = 0.0009, effect size = 0.12), and greater free moments (p = 0.01, effect size = 0.07) when compared to the non-overweight groups. Moreover, a significant body mass by foot pronation interaction was found for peak medio-lateral loading rate. Non-excessive body weight/pronated feet, excessive body weight/non-pronated feet and excessive body weight/pronation groups presented lower medio-lateral loading rates compared to non-excessive body weight/non-pronated feet (p = 0.0001, effect size = 0.13).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that excessive body weight has an impact on ground reaction forces during running. We particularly noted an increase in medio-lateral and torsional forces during the stance phase. Individuals with excessive body weight appear to adapt their running patterns in an effort to attenuate early vertical impact loading.

Towards functionally individualised designed footwear recommendation for overuse injury prevention: a scoping review

Injury prevention is essential in running due to the risk of overuse injury development. Tailoring running shoes to individual needs may be a promising strategy to reduce this risk. Novel manufacturing processes allow the production of individualised running shoes that incorporate features that meet individual biomechanical and experiential needs. However, specific ways to individualise footwear to reduce injury risk are poorly understood. Therefore, this scoping review provides an overview of (1) footwear design features that have the potential for individualisation; and (2) the literature on the differential responses to footwear design features between selected groups of individuals. These purposes focus exclusively on reducing the risk of overuse injuries. We included studies in the English language on adults that analysed: (1) potential interaction effects between footwear design features and subgroups of runners or covariates (e.g., age, sex) for running-related biomechanical risk factors or injury incidences; (2) footwear comfort perception for a systematically modified footwear design feature. Most of the included articles (n = 107) analysed male runners. Female runners may be more susceptible to footwear-induced changes and overuse injury development; future research should target more heterogonous sampling. Several footwear design features (e.g., midsole characteristics, upper, outsole profile) show potential for individualisation. However, the literature addressing individualised footwear solutions and the potential to reduce biomechanical risk factors is limited. Future studies should leverage more extensive data collections considering relevant covariates and subgroups while systematically modifying isolated footwear design features to inform footwear individualisation.

Effects of Barefoot and Shod Conditions on the Kinematics and Kinetics of the Lower Extremities in Alternating Jump Rope Skipping-A One-Dimensional Statistical Parameter Mapping Study

PURPOSE

To explore the difference in the biomechanics of the lower extremity during alternating jump rope skipping (AJRS) under barefoot and shod conditions.

METHODS

Fourteen experienced AJRS participants were randomly assigned to wear jump rope shoes or be barefoot (BF) during the AJRS at a self-selected speed. The Qualisys motion capture system and Kistler force platform were used to synchronously collect the ground reaction forces and trajectory data of the hip, knee, ankle, and metatarsophalangeal (MTP) joints. One-dimensional statistical parameter mapping was used to analyze the kinematics and kinetics of the lower extremity under both conditions using paired t-tests.

RESULTS

Wearing shoes resulted in a significant decrease in the ROM (p < 0.001) and peak angular velocity (p < 0.001) of the MTP joint during the landing phase. In addition, the MTP joint power (p < 0.001) was significantly larger under shod condition at 92-100% of the landing phase. Moreover, wearing shoes reduced the peak loading rate (p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

The findings suggest that wearing shoes during AJRS could provide better propulsion during push-off by increasing the MTP plantarflexion joint power. In addition, our results emphasize the significance of the ankle and MTP joint by controlling the ankle and MTP joint angle.

The biomechanical effects of insoles with different cushioning on the knee joints of people with different body mass index grades

Background: Enhancing knee protection for individuals who are overweight and obese is crucial. Cushioning insoles may improve knee biomechanics and play a significant protective role. However, the impact of insoles with varying cushioning properties on knee joints in individuals with different body mass index (BMI) categories remains unknown. Our aim was to investigate the biomechanical effects of insoles with different cushioning properties on knee joints across different BMI grades. Methods: Gravity-driven impact tests were used to characterize the cushioning properties of three types of Artificial Cartilage Foam (ACF18, 28, and 38) and ethylene-vinyl acetate (EVA) insoles. Knee joint sagittal, coronal, and vertical axis angles and moments were collected from healthy-weight (BMI 18.5-23.9 kg/m2, n = 15), overweight (BMI 24.0-27.9 kg/m2, n = 16), and obese (BMI ≥28.0 kg/m2, n = 15) individuals randomly assigned four different insoles during a drop jump. The Kruskal-Wallis test and mixed model repeated measures analysis of variance were used to compare differences among cushioning and biomechanical data across various insoles, respectively. Results: ACF showed higher cushioning than EVA, and ACF38 was the highest among the three types of ACF (all p < 0.001). During the drop jump, the knee flexion angles and moments of the ACF insoles were lower than those of the EVA insoles, the knee adduction angles of the ACF18 and ACF28 insoles were lower than those of the EVA insoles, and ACF18 insoles increased the first cushion time (all p < 0.05) for all participants in whom biomechanical variables demonstrated no interactions between insoles and BMI. Regarding the BMI-dependent biomechanical variables, compared with the EVA insoles, ACF28 insoles decreased the knee flexion angle and ACF38 insoles decreased the knee adduction and rotation moment in the healthy-weight group; ACF18 insoles decreased the knee flexion angle and ACF38 insoles decreased the knee moment in the overweight group; ACF28 insoles decreased the knee flexion and adduction moment, and ACF38 insoles decreased the knee flexion angle and rotation moment in the obese group (all p < 0.05). Conclusion: Insoles with higher cushioning properties could improve knee biomechanics and provide better knee joint protection in people across different BMI ranges.

Using human-in-the-loop optimization for guiding manual prosthesis adjustments: a proof-of-concept study

Introduction: Human-in-the-loop optimization algorithms have proven useful in optimizing complex interactive problems, such as the interaction between humans and robotic exoskeletons. Specifically, this methodology has been proven valid for reducing metabolic cost while wearing robotic exoskeletons. However, many prostheses and orthoses still consist of passive elements that require manual adjustments of settings. Methods: In the present study, we investigated if human-in-the-loop algorithms could guide faster manual adjustments in a procedure similar to fitting a prosthesis. Eight healthy participants wore a prosthesis simulator and walked on a treadmill at 0.8 ms-1 under 16 combinations of shoe heel height and pylon height. A human-in-the-loop optimization algorithm was used to find an optimal combination for reducing the loading rate on the limb contralateral to the prosthesis simulator. To evaluate the performance of the optimization algorithm, we used a convergence criterium. We evaluated the accuracy by comparing it against the optimum from a full sweep of all combinations. Results: In five out of the eight participants, the human-in-the-loop optimization reduced the time taken to find an optimal combination; however, in three participants, the human-in-the-loop optimization either converged by the last iteration or did not converge. Discussion: Findings from this study show that the human-in-the-loop methodology could be helpful in tasks that require manually adjusting an assistive device, such as optimizing an unpowered prosthesis. However, further research is needed to achieve robust performance and evaluate applicability in persons with amputation wearing an actual prosthesis.

Adolescents running in conventional running shoes have lower vertical instantaneous loading rates but greater asymmetry than running barefoot or in partial-minimal shoes

Footwear may moderate the transiently heightened asymmetry in lower limb loading associated with peak growth in adolescence during running. This repeated-measures study compared the magnitude and symmetry of peak vertical ground reaction force and instantaneous loading rates (VILRs) in adolescents during barefoot and shod running. Ten adolescents (age, 10.6 ± 1.7 years) ran at self-selected speed (1.7 ± 0.3 m/s) on an instrumented treadmill under three counter-balanced conditions; barefoot and shod with partial-minimal and conventional running shoes. All participants were within one year of their estimated peak height velocity based on sex-specific regression equations. Foot-strike patterns, peak vertical ground reaction force and VILRs were recorded during 20 seconds of steady-state running. Symmetry of ground reaction forces was assessed using the symmetry index. Repeated-measures ANOVAs were used to compare conditions (α=.05). Adolescents used a rearfoot foot-strike pattern during barefoot and shod running. Use of conventional shoes resulted in a lower VILR (P < .05, dz = 0.9), but higher VILR asymmetry (P < .05) than running barefoot (dz = 1.5) or in partial-minimal shoes (dz = 1.6). Conventional running shoes result in a lower VILR than running unshod or in partial-minimal shoes but may have the unintended consequence of increasing VILR asymmetry. The findings may have implications for performance, musculoskeletal development and injury in adolescents.

How Connecting the Legs with a Spring Improves Human Running Economy

Connecting the legs with a spring attached to the shoelaces reduces the energy cost of running, but how the spring reduces the energy burden of individual muscles remains unknown. We generated muscle-driven simulations of seven individuals running with and without the spring to discern whether savings occurred during the stance phase or the swing phase, and to identify which muscles contributed to energy savings. We computed differences in muscle-level energy consumption, muscle activations, and changes in muscle-fiber velocity and force between running with and without the spring. Across participants, running with the spring reduced the measured rate of energy expenditure by 0.9 W/kg (8.3%). Simulations predicted a 1.4 W/kg (12.0%) reduction in the average rate of energy expenditure and correctly identified that the spring reduced rates of energy expenditure for all participants. Simulations showed most of the savings occurred during stance (1.5 W/kg), though the rate of energy expenditure was also reduced during swing (0.3 W/kg). The energetic savings were distributed across the quadriceps, hip flexor, hip abductor, hamstring, hip adductor, and hip extensor muscle groups, whereas no changes in the rate of energy expenditure were observed in the plantarflexor or dorsiflexor muscles. Energetic savings were facilitated by reductions in the rate of mechanical work performed by muscles and their estimated rate of heat production. The simulations provide insight into muscle-level changes that occur when utilizing an assistive device and the mechanisms by which a spring connecting the legs improves running economy.

Measurement and reporting of footwear characteristics in running biomechanics: A systematic search and narrative synthesis of contemporary research methods

This review aimed to synthesise the methods for assessing and reporting footwear characteristics among studies evaluating the effect of footwear on running biomechanics. Electronic searches of Scopus®, EBSCO, PubMed®, ScienceDirect®, and Web of Science® were performed to identify original research articles of the effect of running footwear on running biomechanics published from 1^st January 2015 to 7^th October 2020. Risk of bias among included studies was not assessed. Results were presented via narrative synthesis. Eligible studies compared the effect of two or more footwear conditions in adult runners on a biomechanical parameter. Eighty-seven articles were included and data from 242 individual footwear were extracted. Predominantly, studies reported footwear taxonomy (i.e., classification) and manufacturer information, however omitted detail regarding the technical specifications of running footwear and did not use validated footwear reporting tools. There is inconsistency among contemporary studies in the methods by which footwear characteristics are assessed and reported. These findings point towards a need for consensus regarding the reporting of these characteristics within biomechanical studies to facilitate the conduct of systematic reviews and meta-analyses pertaining to the effect of running footwear on running biomechanics.

Is there any biomechanical justification to use hopping as a return to running test? A cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the agreement and the correlation between asymmetry indexes of leg stiffness (AI(K_leg)) in running and hopping and the correlation between leg stiffness (K_leg) in running and hopping.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Clinical facility.

PARTICIPANTS

Twelve healthy runners (5 women and 7 men; mean (SD) age = 36.6 (10.1) years; activity level = 6.4 (0.9) on Tegner scale).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

A treadmill instrumented by photoelectric cells was used to collect data (flight and contact times) during running assessment (preferential and imposed velocity (3.33 m s^-1) and during a hopping test. K_leg and AI(K_leg) were computed for each modality. Correlation tests were performed, and Bland Altman's plot was created.

RESULTS

A significant and large correlation was found between K_leg in hopping and running at imposed speed (r = 0.6, p = 0.001). An acceptable agreement was found between the AIs in hopping and running, with a bias of 0.04 (-0.15-0.06) at imposed speed and 0.03 (-0.13-0.07) at preferred speed.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that testing an athlete for asymmetry in hopping might help to understand what happens in running. For this purpose, further research is needed, especially in an injured population, to better understand the association between biomechanical asymmetry in hopping and running.

The influence of running shoes on familiarization time for treadmill running biomechanics evaluation

This study investigated treadmill familiarisation time in different shoe conditions by comparing lower limb consecutive kinematics waveforms using a trend symmetry method to calculate trend symmetry index, range amplitude ratio and range offset. Eighteen young adults (26.6 ± 3.3 years, 7 females) completed three 10-minute running trials at their preferred running speed (2.30 ± 0.17 m/s) on a treadmill with three shoe conditions (i.e., usual, minimalist and maximalist shoes) in a random order. Sagittal lower limb kinematic data were recorded using inertial measurement units. The results showed that sagittal-plane kinematic waveforms in the hip, knee and ankle remained consistent (trend symmetry > 0.95) without extreme excursions (range amplitude ratio ≈ 1) over 10 minutes within each testing shoe condition. Significant time × shoe interaction effect was observed in range offset (i.e., absolute differences in the average degree of kinematic waveforms between consecutive minutes) at ankle (p = 0.029, ŋ_p² = 0.096) and knee (p = 0.002, ŋ_p² = 0.126). Post-hoc analysis suggested that running with novel shoes required a shorter time to achieve stable lower limb kinematics (2 to 3 minutes) compared with usual shoes (7 minutes). In conclusion, young healthy adults need up to 3 and 7 minutes to familiarise to the treadmill when running at their preferred speed with their novel and usual running shoes.

A systematic review of the effect of running shoes on running economy, performance and biomechanics: analysis by brand and model

This systematic review aims to synthesise the effects of current shoe models in each shoe category and their specific features on running economy, performance and biomechanics. Electronic databases such as Web of Science, SPORTDiscuss, PubMed and Scopus were used to identify studies from 2015 to date. Due to the existing lack of consensus to define running shoes, only studies that specified the shoe brand and models used to assess their effect over runners with a certain level of fitness and training routine were included. Quality assessment of cross-sectional and intervention studies was conducted by three independent raters using a modified version of the Quality Index and the PEDro scale, respectively. A total of 36 articles were finally included, involving the analysis of 61 different shoe models over 10 different topics (i.e., running economy, running performance, spatiotemporal parameters, ground reaction forces, joint stiffness, achilles tendon, plantar pressure, tibiofemoral load, foot strike pattern and joint coordination). With this review, runners and practitioners in the field that are concerned about selecting a suitable shoe for performance, training, or injury prevention functionality have clear information about the effects of the current shoe models and their specific features.

Lower impact forces but greater burden for the musculoskeletal system in running shoes with greater cushioning stiffness

In a recent randomised trial investigating running shoe cushioning, injury risk was greater in recreational runners who trained in the shoe version with greater cushioning stiffness (Stiff) compared to those using the Soft version. However, vertical impact peak force (VIPF) was lower in the Stiff version. To investigate further the mechanisms involved in the protective effect of greater cushioning, the present study used an intra-subject design and analysed the differences in running kinematics and kinetics between the Stiff and Soft shoe versions on a subsample of 41 runners from the previous trial. Data were recorded in the two shoe conditions using an instrumented treadmill at 10 km.h^-1. VIPF was confirmed to be lower in the Stiff version compared to the Soft version (1.39 ± 0.25 vs. 1.50 ± 0.25 BW, respectively; p = 0.009, d = 0.42), but not difference was observed in vertical loading rate (p = 0.255 and 0.897 for vertical average and instantaneous loading rate, respectively). Ankle eversion maximal velocity was not different (p = 0.099), but the Stiff version induced greater ankle negative work (-0.55 ± 0.09 vs. -0.52 ± 0.10 J.kg^-1; p = 0.009, d = 0.32), maximal ankle negative power (-7.21 ± 1.90 vs. -6.96 ± 1.92 W.kg^-1; p = 0.037, d = 0.13) and maximal hip extension moment (1.25 ± 0.32 vs.1.18 ± 0.30 N.m.kg^-1; p = 0.009, d = 0.22). Our results suggest that the Stiff shoe version is related to increased mechanical burden for the musculoskeletal system, especially around the ankle joint.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03115437.

Insight into the hierarchical control governing leg stiffness during the stance phase of running

Leg stiffness plays a key role in the storage and release of elastic energy during stance. However, the extent to which a runner is able to reuse stored energy remains a limiting factor in determining their running effectiveness. In this study, ten habitual rearfoot strikers and ten habitual forefoot strikers were asked to run on a treadmill in three footwear conditions: traditional, neutral, and minimal running shoes. We examined the effect of habitual foot strike pattern and footwear on leg stiffness control within three task-relevant phases of stance (i.e. touch-down, loading, unloading). Control was quantified using stride-to-stride leg stiffness time-series and the coefficient of variability and detrended fluctuation analysis (DFA). The results are interpreted within a theoretical framework that blends dynamic systems theory and optimal feedback control. Results indicate that leg stiffness control is tightly regulated by an active control process during the loading period of stance. In contrast, the touch-down and unloading phases are driven mostly by passive allometric control mechanisms. The effect of footwear on leg stiffness control was inconclusive due to inconsistent trends across three shoe types. However, stiffness control was affected by landing technique. Habitual rearfoot strike runners have reduced DFA values during the touch-down and unloading phases. These sub-phases are associated with an allometric control process and suggests that rearfoot strike runners express a reduction in system complexity for leg stiffness control and hence, a less adaptable system.

Not Lower-Limb Joint Strength and Stiffness but Vertical Stiffness and Isometric Force-Time Characteristics Correlate With Running Economy in Recreational Male Runners

Neuromuscular characteristics, such as lower-limb joint strength, the ability to reuse elastic energy, and to generate force are essential factors influencing running performance. However, their relationship with running economy (RE) remains unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the correlations between isokinetic lower-limb joint peak torque (PT), lower-limb stiffness, isometric force-time characteristics and RE among recreational-trained male runners. Thirty male collegiate runners (aged 20–22 years, VO2max: 54.02 ± 4.67 ml·kg−1·min−1) participated in test sessions on four separate days. In the first session, the body composition and RE at 10 km·h−1 were determined. In the second session, leg and vertical stiffness (Kleg and Kvert), knee and ankle stiffness (Kknee and Kankle) were evaluated. In the third session, isokinetic knee and ankle joint PT at velocity of 60°s−1 were tested. The force-time characteristics of isometric mid-thigh pull (IMTP) were evaluated in the final session. The Pearson’s product-moment correlations analysis shows that there were no significant relationships between knee and ankle joint concentric and eccentric PT, Kknee and Kankle, Kleg, and RE at 10 km·h−1. However, Kvert (r = −0.449, p &lt; 0.05) and time-specific rate of force development (RFD) for IMTP from 0 to 50 to 0–300 ms (r = −0.434 to −0.534, p &lt; 0.05) were significantly associated with RE. Therefore, superior RE in recreational runners may not be related to knee and ankle joint strength and stiffness. It seems to be associated with vertical stiffness and the capacity to rapidly produce force within 50–300 ms throughout the lower limb.

Leg stiffness during running in highly cushioned shoes with a carbon-fiber plate and traditional shoes

BACKGROUND

Nike ZoomX Vaporfly (NVF) improves running economy and performance. The biomechanical mechanisms of these shoes are not fully understood, although thicker midsoles and carbon fiber plates are considered to play an important role in the spring-like leg characteristics during running. Leg stiffness (k_leg) in the spring-mass model has been commonly used to investigate spring-like running mechanics during running.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Does k_leg during running differ between NVF and traditional (TRAD) shoes?

METHODS

Eighteen male habitual forefoot and/or midfoot strike runners ran on a treadmill at 20 km/h with NVF and TRAD shoes, respectively. k_leg, vertical oscillation of the center of mass (∆CoM), spatiotemporal parameters, and mechanical loading were determined.

RESULTS

k_leg was 4.8% lower in the NVF shoe condition than in the TRAD condition, although no significant difference was observed. ∆CoM was not significantly different between shoe conditions. Spatiotemporal parameters and mechanical loading were also not significantly different between shoe conditions.

SIGNIFICANCE

The NVF shoe is well known as improving the running economy and running performance for the cause by characteristics of better spring function. Contrary to expectation, k_leg and other parameters were not significantly different during running in the NVF compared to TRAD shoe at 20 km/h. These findings indicate that well-trained runners' spring-like running mechanics would not alter even if wearing the NVF shoes.

Comparison of lightweight and traditional figure skating blades, a prototype blade with integrated damping system and a running shoe in simulated figure skating landings and vertical countermovement jumps, and evaluation of dampening properties of the prototype blade

To date, there is no empirical evidence suggesting greater jump heights or cushioned landings when using figure skating (FS) blades of different mass and design. This study examined the effect of lightweight (Gold Seal Revolution from John Wilson) and traditional (Apex Supreme from Jackson Ultima and Volant from Riedell) blades, a new prototype blade with an integrated damping system (damping blade) in two different damping configurations, and running shoes (Runfalcon from Adidas) on kinetics and kinematics during simulated on-ice landings from 0.6 m and maximal countermovement jumps on synthetic ice, and measured dampening properties of the damping blade. Seventeen participants executed trials in the six footwear conditions blinded to the different blades and acted as their own control for statistical comparison. There were no differences between the lightweight and traditional blades on the maximal vertical ground reaction force during the landing. Image analysis showed a damping effect in the damping blade that significantly decreased the landing load for all participants (mean 4.38 ± 0.68 bodyweight) (p ≤ 0.006), on average between 10.1 and 14.3% compared to lightweight and traditional blades (4.87 ± 1.01 to 5.11 ± 0.88 bodyweight). The maximal jump height achieved was the same in all FS blades.

Running Injury Paradigms and Their Influence on Footwear Design Features and Runner Assessment Methods: A Focused Review to Advance Evidence-Based Practice for Running Medicine Clinicians

Many runners seek health professional advice regarding footwear recommendations to reduce injury risk. Unfortunately, many clinicians, as well as runners, have ideas about how to select running footwear that are not scientifically supported. This is likely because much of the research on running footwear has not been highly accessible outside of the technical footwear research circle. Therefore, the purpose of this narrative review is to update clinical readers on the state of the science for assessing runners and recommending running footwear that facilitate the goals of the runner. We begin with a review of basic footwear construction and the features thought to influence biomechanics relevant to the running medicine practitioner. Subsequently, we review the four main paradigms that have driven footwear design and recommendation with respect to injury risk reduction: Pronation Control, Impact Force Modification, Habitual Joint (Motion) Path, and Comfort Filter. We find that evidence in support of any paradigm is generally limited. In the absence of a clearly supported paradigm, we propose that in general clinicians should recommend footwear that is lightweight, comfortable, and has minimal pronation control technology. We further encourage clinicians to arm themselves with the basic understanding of the known effects of specific footwear features on biomechanics in order to better recommend footwear on a patient-by-patient basis.

Relationship Between Isokinetic Lower-Limb Joint Strength, Isometric Time Force Characteristics, and Leg-Spring Stiffness in Recreational Runners

Neuromuscular characteristics, such as lower-limb joint strength and the ability to rapidly generate force, may play an important role in leg-spring stiffness regulation. This study aimed to investigate the relationship between isokinetic knee and ankle joint peak torque (PT), the force-time characteristics of isometric mid-thigh pull (IMTP), and leg stiffness (K_leg)/vertical stiffness (K_vert) in recreationally trained runners. Thirty-one male runners were recruited and underwent three separate tests. In the first session, the body composition, K_leg, and K_vert at running speeds of 12 and 14 km⋅h^–1 were measured. In the second session, isokinetic knee and ankle joint PT at 60°⋅s^–1 were tested. The force-time characteristics of the IMTP were evaluated in the final session. Pearson’s product-moment correlations, with the Benjamini–Hochberg correction procedure, showed that the knee flexor concentric and eccentric and extensor concentric PT (r = 0.473–0.654, p < 0.05) were moderate to largely correlated with K_leg and K_vert at 12 and 14 km⋅h^–1. The knee extensor eccentric PT (r = 0.440, p = 0.050) was moderately correlated with the 14 km⋅h^–1K_vert. The ankle plantar flexor concentric and dorsiflexor eccentric PT (r = 0.506–0.571, p < 0.05) were largely correlated with K_leg at 12 km⋅h^–1. The ankle plantar flexor concentric and eccentric and dorsiflexor eccentric PT (r = 0.436–0.561, p < 0.05) were moderate to largely correlated with K_vert at 12 and 14 km⋅h^–1. For IMTP testing, high correlation was only found between the IMPT peak force (PF) and K_vert at 14 km⋅h^–1 (r = 0.510, p = 0.014). Thus, superior leg-spring stiffness in recreational runners may be related to increased knee and ankle joint strength, eccentric muscular capacity, and maximal force production.

Evaluating the Effect of Shoes with Varying Mass on Vertical Ground Reaction Force Parameters in Short-Term Running

Past investigations have revealed that running shoes affect ground reaction force parameters. However, these studies are unclear as to whether these changes, which occur while running in different shoe types of differing masses, are the result of the structural design or the mass of the shoe. The main aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of shoe mass on vertical ground reaction force parameters: active peak and impulse. Methods. 21 male runners (24.52 years old (± 3.09) and 77.13kg (± 7.9)) participated in the experiment. A baseline shoe (BS) = 283g and four weighted shoes (shoe 2 = 333g, shoe 3 = 433g, shoe 4 = 533g and shoe 5 = 598g) were compared for 8 minutes of running on the instrumented treadmill. Each shoe was compared in a repeated measurement with the BS. Results showed that active peaks and impulses differed significantly (p < .05) between the BS and weighted shoes, except for shoe 2. From the threshold of 433g (shoe 3, which is 1.5 times heavier than the BS), we observed a significant increase in the vertical ground reaction force peak (1.86%) and impulse (1.84%). Other shoes such as shoe 4 and shoe 5, produced increasingly active peaks (N) of 2.08% N and 2.45% N compared to the BS. Increase of shoe masses in shoe 3, shoe 4, and shoe 5 resulted in an increase of impulse up to 1.84% Nm, 1.85% Nm and 2.49% Nm compared to the BS. Our determination of the shoe masses influencing these kinetic parameters may be a step towards reducing running-related injuries that result from accumulated microtrauma.

Relevance of Frequency-Domain Analyses to Relate Shoe Cushioning, Ground Impact Forces and Running Injury Risk: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Trial With 800+ Recreational Runners

Cushioning systems in running shoes are used assuming that ground impact forces relate to injury risk and that cushioning materials reduce these impact forces. In our recent trial, the more cushioned shoe version was associated with lower injury risk. However, vertical impact peak force was higher in participants with the Soft shoe version. The primary objective of this study was to investigate the effect of shoe cushioning on the time, magnitude and frequency characteristics of peak forces using frequency-domain analysis by comparing the two study groups from our recent trial (Hard and Soft shoe group, respectively). The secondary objective was to investigate if force characteristics are prospectively associated with the risk of running-related injury. This is a secondary analysis of a double-blinded randomized trial on shoe cushioning with a biomechanical running analysis at baseline and a 6-month follow-up on running exposure and injury. Participants (n = 848) were tested on an instrumented treadmill at their preferred running speed in their randomly allocated shoe condition. The vertical ground reaction force signal for each stance phase was decomposed into the frequency domain using the discrete Fourier transform. Both components were recomposed into the time domain using the inverse Fourier transform. An analysis of variance was used to compare force characteristics between the two study groups. Cox regression analysis was used to investigate the association between force characteristics and injury risk. Participants using the Soft shoes displayed lower impact peak force (p < 0.001, d = 0.23), longer time to peak force (p < 0.001, d = 0.25), and lower average loading rate (p < 0.001, d = 0.18) of the high frequency signal compared to those using the Hard shoes. Participants with low average and instantaneous loading rate of the high frequency signal had lower injury risk [Sub hazard rate ratio (SHR) = 0.49 and 0.55; 95% Confidence Interval (CI) = 0.25–0.97 and 0.30–0.99, respectively], and those with early occurrence of impact peak force (high frequency signal) had greater injury risk (SHR = 1.60; 95% CI = 1.05–2.53). Our findings may explain the protective effect of the Soft shoe version previously observed. The present study also demonstrates that frequency-domain analyses may provide clinically relevant impact force characteristics.

Clinical Trial Registration:https://clinicaltrials.gov/, identifier: 9NCT03115437.

Effects of footwear cushioning on leg and longitudinal arch stiffness during running

During running, humans increase leg stiffness on more compliant surfaces through an in-series spring relationship to maintain constant support mechanics. Following this notion, the compliant midsole material of standard footwear may cause individuals to increase leg stiffness while running, especially in footwear with very thick midsoles. Recently, researchers have also proposed that footwear stiffness can affect the stiffness of the foot's longitudinal arch (LA) via a similar mechanism. To test these ideas, we used 3D motion capture to record 20 participants running on a forceplate-instrumented treadmill while barefoot, and while wearing three types of sandals composed of materials ranging an order of magnitude in Young's modulus: ethylene vinyl acetate (EVA), and two varieties of polyurethane rubber (R30 and R60). We calculated leg stiffness using standard methods, and measured LA stiffness based on medial midfoot kinematics. While there was an overall significant effect of footwear on leg stiffness (P = 0.047), post-hoc tests revealed no significant differences among individual pairs of conditions, and there was no effect of footwear on LA stiffness. However, participants exhibited significantly greater LA compression when barefoot than when running in EVA (P = 0.004) or R30 (P = 0.036) sandals. These results indicate that standard footwear midsole materials are too stiff to appreciably affect leg stiffness during running, meaning that increasing midsole thickness is unlikely to cause individuals to alter their leg stiffness. However, use of footwear does cause individuals to restrict LA compression when compared to running barefoot, and further research is needed to understand why.

Leg and Joint Stiffness Adaptations to Minimalist and Maximalist Running Shoes

The running footwear literature reports a conceptual disconnect between shoe cushioning and external impact loading: footwear or surfaces with greater cushioning tend to result in greater impact force characteristics during running. Increased impact loading with maximalist footwear may reflect an altered lower-extremity gait strategy to adjust for running in compliant footwear. The authors hypothesized that ankle and knee joint stiffness would change to maintain the effective vertical stiffness, as cushioning changed with minimalist, traditional, and maximalist footwear. Eleven participants ran on an instrumental treadmill (3.5 m·s-1) for a 5-minute familiarization in each footwear, plus an additional 110 seconds before data collection. Vertical, leg, ankle, and knee joint stiffness and vertical impact force characteristics were calculated. Mixed model with repeated measures tested differences between footwear conditions. Compared with traditional and maximalist, the minimalist shoes were associated with greater average instantaneous and average vertical loading rates (P < .050), greater vertical stiffness (P ≤ .010), and less change in leg length between initial contact and peak resultant ground reaction force (P < .050). No other differences in stiffness or impact variables were observed. The shoe cushioning paradox did not hold in this study due to a similar musculoskeletal strategy for running in traditional and maximalist footwear and running with a more rigid limb in minimalist footwear.

Biomechanical analysis of two runners who developed leg injuries during a six-week transition to maximal running shoes: A case series

Achilles tendinopathy (AT) and medial tibial stress syndrome (MTSS) are two of the most common running-related injuries. In a previous study investigating running biomechanics before and after a six-week transition to maximal running shoes, two runners dropped out of this study due to Achilles pain and shin pain, respectively. The purpose of this case series was to investigate running biomechanics in those two runners, identifying potential causes for injury in relation to maximal shoe use. Running biomechanics were collected in a laboratory setting for these two runners wearing both a maximal running shoe and traditional running shoe before the six-week transition using an 8-camera motion capture system and two embedded force plates. Both runners displayed prolonged eversion in the maximal shoe, which has been previously cited as a potential risk factor for developing Achilles tendinopathy and medial tibial stress syndrome. Relatively high loading rates and impact forces were also observed in the runner with shin pain in the maximal shoe, which may have contributed to their pain. More prospective research on injury rates in individuals running in maximal shoes is needed.

Can the "Appropriate" Footwear Prevent Injury in Leisure-Time Running? Evidence Versus Beliefs

Leisure-time running is one of the most popular forms of physical activity around the world. It can be practiced almost everywhere and requires mainly a pair of "appropriate" running shoes. However, the term appropriate is ambiguous, and the properties of running footwear have always generated hot debates among clinicians, coaches, and athletes, whatever the level of practice. As the main interface between the runner's foot and the ground, the shoe potentially plays an important role in managing repetitive external mechanical loads applied to the musculoskeletal system and, thus, in injury prevention. Consequently, over the last decades, running shoes have been prescribed based on matching shoe features to foot morphology. This strategy aligns with the popular belief that footwear is one of the main extrinsic factors influencing running-related injury risk. Despite a seemingly sound strategy for shoe prescription and constant progress in running-footwear technology, the injury rate remains high. Therefore, our aim in this narrative literature review is to clarify whether the prescription of appropriate footwear to prevent injury in running is evidence based, the result of logical fallacy, or just a myth. The literature presented in this review is based on a nonsystematic search of the MEDLINE database and focuses on work investigating the effect of shoe features on injury risk in runners. In addition, key elements for a proper understanding of the literature on running footwear and injury risk are addressed. In this literature review, we outline (1) the main risk factors and the mechanisms underlying the occurrence of running-related injury, (2) important methodologic considerations for generating high-level evidence, (3) the evidence regarding the influence of running-shoe features on injury risk, (4) future directions for research, and (5) final general recommendations.

Comparing walking biomechanics of older females in maximal, minimal, and traditional shoes

BACKGROUND

Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a degenerative joint disease that affects millions of individuals each year. Several biomechanical variables during walking have been identified as risk factors for developing knee OA, including the peak external knee adduction moment (KAM) and the knee flexion angle at initial contact. Many interventions have been studied to help mitigate these risk factors, including footwear. However, it is largely unknown how varying shoe cushioning may affect walking biomechanics related to knee OA risk.

RESEARCH QUESTION

What is the effect of maximally and minimally cushioned shoes on walking biomechanics compared to a traditionally cushioned shoe in older females?

METHODS

Walking biomechanics in three shoes (maximal, traditional, minimal) were collected on 16 healthy females ages 50-70 using an 8-camera 3D motion capture system and two embedded force plates. Key biomechanical variables related to knee OA disease risk were compared between shoes using repeated measures ANOVAs.

RESULTS

The KAM was significantly larger in the maximal shoe (p = 0.005), while the knee flexion angle at initial contact was significantly larger in both the maximal and minimal shoe compared to the traditional shoe (p = .000). Additionally, the peak knee flexion angle (p = .000) and the loading rates of the vertical ground reaction force were (instantaneous: p = 0.001; average: p = .010) were significantly higher in the minimal shoe.

SIGNIFICANCE

While these results are specific to the shoes used in this study, clinicians should exercise caution in prescribing maximal or minimal shoes to females in this age group who may be at risk of knee OA given these results. Research is needed on the effect of these shoes in patients with knee OA.

Leg Stiffness and Vertical Stiffness of Habitual Forefoot and Rearfoot Strikers during Running

Foot strike patterns influence the running efficiency and may be an injury risk. However, differences in the leg stiffness between runners with habitual forefoot (hFFS) and habitual rearfoot (hRFS) strike patterns remain unclear. This study aimed at determining the differences in the stiffness, associated loading rate, and kinematic performance between runners with hFFS and hRFS during running. Kinematic and kinetic data were collected amongst 39 runners with hFFS and 39 runners with hRFS running at speed of 3.3 m/s, leg stiffness (Kleg), and vertical stiffness (Kvert), and impact loads were calculated. Results found that runners with hFFS had greater Kleg (P = 0.010, Cohen′s d = 0.60), greater peak vertical ground reaction force (vGRF) (P = 0.040, Cohen′s d = 0.47), shorter contact time(t_c) (P < 0.001, Cohen′s d = 0.85), and smaller maximum leg compression (ΔL ) (P = 0.002, Cohen′s d = 0.72) compared with their hRFS counterparts. Runners with hFFS had lower impact peak (IP) (P < 0.001, Cohen′s d = 1.65), vertical average loading rate (VALR) (P < 0.001, Cohen′s d = 1.20), and vertical instantaneous loading rate (VILR) (P < 0.001, Cohen′s d = 1.14) compared with runners with hRFS. Runners with hFFS landed with a plantar flexed ankle, whereas runners with hRFS landed with a dorsiflexed ankle (P < 0.001, Cohen′s d = 3.35). Runners with hFFS also exhibited more flexed hip (P = 0.020, Cohen′s d = 0.61) and knee (P < 0.001, Cohen′s d = 1.15) than runners with hRFS at initial contact. These results might indicate that runners with hFFS were associated with better running economy through the transmission of elastic energy.

Effect of shoe cushioning on landing impact forces and spatiotemporal parameters during running: results from a randomized trial including 800+ recreational runners

AbstractIn a recent randomized trial including 800+ recreational runners, injury risk was lower in those who received the Soft shoe version compared to those using the Hard version (Hazard ratio = 1.52; 95% Confidence Interval = 1.07-2.16). Here, we investigated the effect of shoe cushioning on ground reaction forces (GRF) and spatiotemporal parameters in the same cohort, with a special focus on Vertical Impact Peak Force (VIPF) and Vertical Instantaneous Loading Rate (VILR). Healthy runners (n = 848) randomly received one of two shoe prototypes that differed only in their cushioning properties (Global stiffness: 61 ± 3 and 95 ± 6 N/mm in the Soft and Hard versions, respectively). Participants were tested on an instrumented treadmill at their preferred running speed. GRF data was recorded over 2 min. VIPF was higher in the Soft shoe group compared to the Hard shoe group (1.53 ± 0.21 vs. 1.44 ± 0.23 BW, respectively; p < 0.001). However, the proportion of steps with detectable VIPF was lower in the Soft shoe group (84 vs. 97%, respectively; p < 0.001) and Time to VIPF was longer (46.9 ± 8.5 vs. 43.4 ± 7.4 milliseconds, respectively; p < 0.001). No significant differences were observed for VILR (60.1 ± 13.8 vs. 58.9 ± 15.6 BW/s for Soft and Hard shoe group, respectively; p = 0.070) or any other kinetic variable. These results show that the beneficial effect of greater shoe cushioning on injury risk in the present cohort is not associated with attenuated VIPF and VILR. These GRF metrics may be inappropriate markers of the shoe cushioning-injury risk relationship, while delayed VIPF and the proportion of steps displaying a VIPF could be more relevant.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03115437..

What are the perceptions of runners and healthcare professionals on footwear and running injury risk?

Objectives

There is a gap in research exploring perceptions of runners and healthcare professionals (HCPs) about running footwear and injury risk. The objectives of this study were: (1) to document factors considered by runners when selecting footwear; (2) to compare perceptions on footwear and injury risk in runners and HCPs; and (3) to evaluate the perceived usefulness of an online educational module.

Methods

Using an online survey, we collected information on demographics and perceptions about footwear and injury risk. Runners reported their footwear selection strategy, and HCPs their typical recommendations. An evidence-based educational module was presented, and participants rated its usefulness.

Results

The survey was completed by 2442 participants, of which 1035 completed the optional postmodule questions. Runners reported relying mostly on comfort and advice from retailers when selecting shoes. Perceptions regarding the effects of specific footwear types (minimalist, maximalist), characteristics (softness, drop) and selection strategy (foot type, transition) on biomechanics and injury risk were different between HCPs and runners. Overall, runners perceived footwear as more important to prevent injury than did HCPs (7.6/10, 99% CI 7.4 to 7.7 vs 6.2/10, 99% CI 6.0 to 6.5; p<0.001). Both runners (8.1/10, 99% CI 7.9 to 8.3) and HCPs (8.7/10, 99% CI 8.6 to 8.9) found the educational module useful. A majority of respondents indicated the module changed their perceptions.

Conclusion

Footwear is perceived as important in reducing running injury risk. This online module was deemed useful in educating about footwear evidence. Future studies should evaluate if changes in perceptions can translate to behaviour change and, ultimately, reduced injury risk.

The Influence of Prolonged Running and Footwear on Lower Extremity Joint Stiffness

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to compare leg, sagittal plane knee and ankle, and frontal plane ankle stiffness over the course of a prolonged treadmill run in neutral and stability footwear.

METHODS

Thirteen male habitual rearfoot runners completed two biomechanical testing sessions in which they ran for 21 min at their preferred running speed in a neutral shoe, then changed either into the same neutral shoe or a stability shoe and ran a further 21 min on a force-instrumented treadmill. Three-dimensional kinematics and kinetics were recorded at the beginning and end of each 21-min interval.

RESULTS

No differences were observed in leg stiffness between footwear conditions throughout the run (P > 0.05). Knee stiffness increased during the first 21 min (P = 0.009), whereas ankle stiffness reduced at minute 21 (P = 0.004) and minute 44 (P = 0.006). These changes were modulated by an increase in ankle joint compliance and knee joint moments. No differences were observed between footwear conditions for leg and sagittal plane lower extremity joint stiffness (P > 0.05). During the second half of the run, frontal plane ankle stiffness increased in the stability shoe but decreased in the neutral shoe (P = 0.019), attributed to reduced eversion range of motion caused by the added medial post.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that over the course of a prolonged treadmill run, shock attenuation strategies change, which may affect the knee joint.

Tibial Acceleration-Based Prediction of Maximal Vertical Loading Rate During Overground Running: A Machine Learning Approach

Ground reaction forces are often used by sport scientists and clinicians to analyze the mechanical risk-factors of running related injuries or athletic performance during a running analysis. An interesting ground reaction force-derived variable to track is the maximal vertical instantaneous loading rate (VILR). This impact characteristic is traditionally derived from a fixed force platform, but wearable inertial sensors nowadays might approximate its magnitude while running outside the lab. The time-discrete axial peak tibial acceleration (APTA) has been proposed as a good surrogate that can be measured using wearable accelerometers in the field. This paper explores the hypothesis that applying machine learning to time continuous data (generated from bilateral tri-axial shin mounted accelerometers) would result in a more accurate estimation of the VILR. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of accelerometer-based predictions of the VILR with various machine learning models trained on data of 93 rearfoot runners. A subject-dependent gradient boosted regression trees (XGB) model provided the most accurate estimates (mean absolute error: 5.39 ± 2.04 BW⋅s^–1, mean absolute percentage error: 6.08%). A similar subject-independent model had a mean absolute error of 12.41 ± 7.90 BW⋅s^–1 (mean absolute percentage error: 11.09%). All of our models had a stronger correlation with the VILR than the APTA (p < 0.01), indicating that multiple 3D acceleration features in a learning setting showed the highest accuracy in predicting the lab-based impact loading compared to APTA.

Shoe Cushioning Influences the Running Injury Risk According to Body Mass: A Randomized Controlled Trial Involving 848 Recreational Runners

BACKGROUND

Shoe cushioning is expected to protect runners against repetitive loading of the musculoskeletal system and therefore running-related injuries. Also, it is a common belief that heavier runners should use footwear with increased shock absorption properties to prevent injuries.

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to determine if shoe cushioning influences the injury risk in recreational runners and whether the association depends on the runner's body mass.

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.

METHODS

Healthy runners (n = 848) randomly received 1 of 2 shoe prototypes that only differed in their cushioning properties. Global stiffness was 61.3 ± 2.7 and 94.9 ± 5.9 N/mm in the soft and hard versions, respectively. Participants were classified as light or heavy according to their body mass using the median as a cut-off (78.2 and 62.8 kg in male and female runners, respectively). They were followed over 6 months regarding running activity and injury (any physical complaint reducing/interrupting running activity for at least 7 days). Data were analyzed through time-to-event models with the subhazard rate ratio (SHR) and their 95% confidence interval (CI) as measures of association. A stratified analysis was conducted to investigate the effect of shoe cushioning on the injury risk in lighter and heavier runners.

RESULTS

The runners who had received the hard shoes had a higher injury risk (SHR, 1.52 [95% CI, 1.07-2.16]), while body mass was not associated with the injury risk (SHR, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.99-1.01]). However, after stratification according to body mass, results showed that lighter runners had a higher injury risk in hard shoes (SHR, 1.80 [95% CI, 1.09-2.98]) while heavier runners did not (SHR, 1.23 [95% CI, 0.75-2.03]).

CONCLUSION

The injury risk was higher in participants running in the hard shoes compared with those using the soft shoes. However, the relative protective effect of greater shoe cushioning was found only in lighter runners.

REGISTRATION

NCT03115437 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

The effect of foot orthoses and insoles on running economy and performance in distance runners: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Foot orthoses and insoles are prescribed to runners, however their impact on running economy and performance is uncertain. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the effect of foot orthoses and insoles on running economy and performance in distance runners. Seven electronic databases were searched from inception until June 2018. Eligible studies investigated the effect of foot orthoses or insoles on running economy (using indirect calorimetry) or running performance. Standardised mean differences (SMDs) were computed and meta-analyses were conducted using random effects models. Methodological quality was assessed using the Quality Index. Nine studies met the criteria and were included: five studies investigated the effect of foot orthoses on running economy and four investigated insoles. Foot orthoses were associated with small negative effects on running economy compared to no orthoses (SMD 0.42 [95% CI 0.17,0.72] p = 0.007). Shock absorbing insoles were also associated with negative effects on running economy, but an imprecise estimate (SMD 0.26 [95% CI -0.33,0.84] p = 0.83). Quality Index scores ranged from 4 to 15 out of 17. Foot orthoses and shock absorbing insoles may adversely affect running economy in distance runners. Future research should consider their potential effects on running performance.