Literature DB >> 25633634

Effects of Form-Focused Training on Running Biomechanics: A Pilot Randomized Trial in Untrained Individuals.

Deepak Kumar1, Kelly McDermott2, Haojun Feng2, Veronica Goldman2, Anthony Luke3, Richard B Souza4, Frederick M Hecht2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the changes in running biomechanics after training in form-focused running using ChiRunning versus not-form focused training and self-directed training in untrained individuals.
DESIGN: Pilot study-randomized controlled trial.
SETTING: Research institution with tertiary care medical center. PARTICIPANTS: Seventeen subjects (9 men, 8 women) with prehypertension.
METHODS: Twenty-two participants were randomized to 3 study arms but 17 completed the study. The study arms were: (1) group-based Form-Focused running using ChiRunning (enrolled, n = 10; completed, n = 7); (2) group-based conventional running (enrolled, n = 6; completed, n = 4); and (3) self-directed training with educational materials (enrolled, n = 6; completed, n = 6). The training schedule was prescribed for 8 weeks with 4 weeks of follow-up. All subjects completed overground running motion analyses before and after training. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier for this study is NCT0158718. OUTCOMES: Ankle, knee, hip joint peak moments, and powers; average vertical loading rate (AVLR); impact peak; cadence; stride length; strike index; and stride reach. Paired t tests were used to compare differences within groups over time.
RESULTS: Form-focused group reduced their Stride Reach (P = .047) after the training but not the other groups. Form-focused group showed a close to significant reduction in knee adduction moment (P = .051) and a reduction in the peak ankle eversion moment (P = .027). Self-directed group showed an increase in the running speed (P = .056) and increases in ankle and knee joint powers and moments.
CONCLUSIONS: There are differences in the changes in running biomechanics between individuals trained in running form that emphasizes mid-foot strike, greater cadence, and shorter stride compared with those not trained in the these techniques. These differences may be associated with reduced lower extremity stress in individuals trained in this running form, but more studies are needed to confirm these findings in larger samples.
Copyright © 2015 American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25633634      PMCID: PMC4515408          DOI: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2015.01.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PM R        ISSN: 1934-1482            Impact factor:   2.298


  20 in total

1.  Reduced eccentric loading of the knee with the pose running method.

Authors:  Regan E Arendse; Timothy D Noakes; Liane B Azevedo; Nicholas Romanov; Martin P Schwellnus; Graham Fletcher
Journal:  Med Sci Sports Exerc       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 5.411

2.  Knee angular impulse as a predictor of patellofemoral pain in runners.

Authors:  Darren J Stefanyshyn; Pro Stergiou; Victor M Y Lun; Willem H Meeuwisse; Jay T Worobets
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2006-05-30       Impact factor: 6.202

3.  A comparison of negative joint work and vertical ground reaction force loading rates in Chi runners and rearfoot-striking runners.

Authors:  Donald Lee Goss; Michael T Gross
Journal:  J Orthop Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2013-09-09       Impact factor: 4.751

4.  Energy absorption of impacts during running at various stride lengths.

Authors:  T R Derrick; J Hamill; G E Caldwell
Journal:  Med Sci Sports Exerc       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 5.411

5.  A review of mechanics and injury trends among various running styles.

Authors:  Donald L Goss; Michael T Gross
Journal:  US Army Med Dep J       Date:  2012 Jul-Sep

Review 6.  Lifestyle interventions to reduce raised blood pressure: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Heather O Dickinson; James M Mason; Donald J Nicolson; Fiona Campbell; Fiona R Beyer; Julia V Cook; Bryan Williams; Gary A Ford
Journal:  J Hypertens       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 4.844

Review 7.  The relationship between lower-extremity stress fractures and the ground reaction force: a systematic review.

Authors:  Amir Abbas Zadpoor; Ali Asadi Nikooyan
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2010-09-16       Impact factor: 2.063

8.  Biomechanical factors associated with tibial stress fracture in female runners.

Authors:  Clare E Milner; Reed Ferber; Christine D Pollard; Joseph Hamill; Irene S Davis
Journal:  Med Sci Sports Exerc       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 5.411

9.  Revision of the Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire (PAR-Q).

Authors:  S Thomas; J Reading; R J Shephard
Journal:  Can J Sport Sci       Date:  1992-12

Review 10.  What are the main running-related musculoskeletal injuries? A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Alexandre Dias Lopes; Luiz Carlos Hespanhol Júnior; Simon S Yeung; Leonardo Oliveira Pena Costa
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2012-10-01       Impact factor: 11.136

View more
  1 in total

1.  Inter-Individual Variability in The Joint Negative Work During Running.

Authors:  Satoru Hashizume; Hiroaki Hobara; Yoshiyuki Kobayashi; Mitsunori Tada; Masaaki Mochimaru
Journal:  Sports Med Int Open       Date:  2018-11-23
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.