Literature DB >> 22085708

A comparison of the spatiotemporal parameters, kinematics, and biomechanics between shod, unshod, and minimally supported running as compared to walking.

Everett B Lohman1, Kanikkai Steni Balan Sackiriyas, R Wesley Swen.   

Abstract

Recreational running has many proven benefits which include increased cardiovascular, physical and mental health. It is no surprise that Running USA reported over 10 million individuals completed running road races in 2009 not to mention recreational joggers who do not wish to compete in organized events. Unfortunately there are numerous risks associated with running, the most common being musculoskeletal injuries attributed to incorrect shoe choice, training errors and excessive shoe wear or other biomechanical factors associated with ground reaction forces. Approximately 65% of chronic injuries in distance runners are related to routine high mileage, rapid increases in mileage, increased intensity, hills or irregular surface running, and surface firmness. Humans have been running barefooted or wearing minimally supportive footwear such as moccasins or sandals since the beginning of time while modernized running shoes were not invented until the 1970s. However, the current trend is that many runners are moving back to barefoot running or running in "minimal" shoes. The goal of this masterclass article is to examine the similarities and differences between shod and unshod (barefoot or minimally supportive running shoes) runners by examining spatiotemporal parameters, energetics, and biomechanics. These running parameters will be compared and contrasted with walking. The most obvious difference between the walking and running gait cycle is the elimination of the double limb support phase of walking gait in exchange for a float (no limb support) phase. The biggest difference between barefoot and shod runners is at the initial contact phase of gait where the barefoot and minimally supported runner initiates contact with their forefoot or midfoot instead of the rearfoot. As movement science experts, physical therapists are often called upon to assess the gait of a running athlete, their choice of footwear, and training regime. With a clearer understanding of running and its complexities, the physical therapist will be able to better identify faults and create informed treatment plans while rehabilitating patients who are experiencing musculoskeletal injuries due to running.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22085708     DOI: 10.1016/j.ptsp.2011.09.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Phys Ther Sport        ISSN: 1466-853X            Impact factor:   2.365


  22 in total

1.  Barefoot running: does it prevent injuries?

Authors:  Kelly Murphy; Emily J Curry; Elizabeth G Matzkin
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 11.136

2.  Lower extremity biomechanical relationships with different speeds in traditional, minimalist, and barefoot footwear.

Authors:  William Fredericks; Seth Swank; Madeline Teisberg; Bethany Hampton; Lance Ridpath; Jandy B Hanna
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2015-05-08       Impact factor: 2.988

3.  A Comparison of Stride Length and Lower Extremity Kinematics during Barefoot and Shod Running in Well Trained Distance Runners.

Authors:  Peter Francis; James Ledingham; Sarah Clarke; D J Collins; Philip Jakeman
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2016-08-05       Impact factor: 2.988

4.  Impact reduction during running: efficiency of simple acute interventions in recreational runners.

Authors:  Marlène Giandolini; Pierrick J Arnal; Guillaume Y Millet; Nicolas Peyrot; Pierre Samozino; Blaise Dubois; Jean-Benoît Morin
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2012-08-09       Impact factor: 3.078

5.  Impact reduction through long-term intervention in recreational runners: midfoot strike pattern versus low-drop/low-heel height footwear.

Authors:  Marlène Giandolini; Nicolas Horvais; Yohann Farges; Pierre Samozino; Jean-Benoît Morin
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2013-04-14       Impact factor: 3.078

6.  SPATIOTEMPORAL COMPARISON OF OVERGROUND AND TREADMILL RUNNING WITH PRESSURE SENSOR INSOLES IN DIVISION I COLLEGIATE RUNNERS.

Authors:  Hanz Tao; Lindsay Joyce; Bethany Kozak; Jacob Luiken; Nathan Wendt
Journal:  Int J Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2019-09

7.  Six Weeks Habituation of Simulated Barefoot Running Induces Neuromuscular Adaptations and Changes in Foot Strike Patterns in Female Runners.

Authors:  Iman Akef Khowailed; Jerrold Petrofsky; Everett Lohman; Noha Daher
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2015-07-13

8.  Foot Morphological Difference between Habitually Shod and Unshod Runners.

Authors:  Yang Shu; Qichang Mei; Justin Fernandez; Zhiyong Li; Neng Feng; Yaodong Gu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-07-06       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Measuring Spatiotemporal Parameters on Treadmill Walking Using Wearable Inertial System.

Authors:  Sofia Scataglini; Stijn Verwulgen; Eddy Roosens; Robby Haelterman; Damien Van Tiggelen
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2021-06-29       Impact factor: 3.576

10.  A consensus definition and rating scale for minimalist shoes.

Authors:  Jean-Francois Esculier; Blaise Dubois; Clermont E Dionne; Jean Leblond; Jean-Sébastien Roy
Journal:  J Foot Ankle Res       Date:  2015-08-19       Impact factor: 2.303

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.