Literature DB >> 22978185

The relationship between running economy and biomechanical variables in distance runners.

Marcus Peikriszwili Tartaruga1, Jeanick Brisswalter, Leonardo Alexandre Peyré-Tartaruga, Aluísio Otávio Vargas Avila, Cristine Lima Alberton, Marcelo Coertjens, Eduardo Lusa Cadore, Carlos Leandro Tiggemann, Eduardo Marczwski Silva, Luiz Fernando Martins Kruel.   

Abstract

In this study, we analyzed the relationship between running economy (RE) and biomechanical parameters in a group running at the same relative intensity and same absolute velocity. Sixteen homogeneous male long-distance runners performed a test to determine RE at 4.4 m.s(-1), corresponding to 11.1% below velocity at the ventilatory threshold. We found significant correlations between RE and biomechanical variables (vertical oscillation of the center of mass, stride frequency, stride length, balance time, relative stride length, range of elbow motion, internal knee, ankle angles at foot strike, and electromyographic activity of the semitendinosus and rectus femoris muscles). In conclusion, changes in running technique can influence RE and lead to improved running performance.

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22978185     DOI: 10.1080/02701367.2012.10599870

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Res Q Exerc Sport        ISSN: 0270-1367            Impact factor:   2.500


  21 in total

1.  The Effect of Training in Minimalist Running Shoes on Running Economy.

Authors:  Sarah T Ridge; Tyler Standifird; Jessica Rivera; A Wayne Johnson; Ulrike Mitchell; Iain Hunter
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2015-08-11       Impact factor: 2.988

Review 2.  Running Performance, VO2max, and Running Economy: The Widespread Issue of Endogenous Selection Bias.

Authors:  Nicolai T Borgen
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 11.136

3.  Stride-to-Stride Variability of the Center of Mass in Male Trained Runners After an Exhaustive Run: A Three Dimensional Movement Variability Analysis With a Subject-Specific Anthropometric Model.

Authors:  Felix Möhler; Bernd Stetter; Hermann Müller; Thorsten Stein
Journal:  Front Sports Act Living       Date:  2021-05-24

4.  Running economy: measurement, norms, and determining factors.

Authors:  Kyle R Barnes; Andrew E Kilding
Journal:  Sports Med Open       Date:  2015-03-27

5.  Influence of slope on subtalar pronation in submaximal running performance.

Authors:  Vinicius Machado de Oliveira; Guilherme Cesca Detoni; Cristhian Ferreira; Bruno Sergio Portela; Marcos Roberto Queiroga; Marcus Peikriszwili Tartaruga
Journal:  Acta Ortop Bras       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 0.513

6.  The correlation between running economy and maximal oxygen uptake: cross-sectional and longitudinal relationships in highly trained distance runners.

Authors:  Andrew J Shaw; Stephen A Ingham; Greg Atkinson; Jonathan P Folland
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-04-07       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Similarities and differences among half-marathon runners according to their performance level.

Authors:  Ana Ogueta-Alday; Juan Carlos Morante; Josué Gómez-Molina; Juan García-López
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-01-24       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Running Technique is an Important Component of Running Economy and Performance.

Authors:  Jonathan P Folland; Sam J Allen; Matthew I Black; Joseph C Handsaker; Stephanie E Forrester
Journal:  Med Sci Sports Exerc       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 5.411

9.  Estimation of Vertical Ground Reaction Forces and Sagittal Knee Kinematics During Running Using Three Inertial Sensors.

Authors:  Frank J Wouda; Matteo Giuberti; Giovanni Bellusci; Erik Maartens; Jasper Reenalda; Bert-Jan F van Beijnum; Peter H Veltink
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2018-03-22       Impact factor: 4.566

10.  Runners Adapt Different Lower-Limb Movement Patterns With Respect to Different Speeds and Downhill Slopes.

Authors:  David Sundström; Markus Kurz; Glenn Björklund
Journal:  Front Sports Act Living       Date:  2021-06-29
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.