Literature DB >> 25729311

Effect of Acute Alterations in Foot Strike Patterns during Running on Sagittal Plane Lower Limb Kinematics and Kinetics.

Kevin A Valenzuela1, Scott K Lynn1, Lisa R Mikelson1, Guillermo J Noffal1, Daniel A Judelson1.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of foot strike patterns and converted foot strike patterns on lower limb kinematics and kinetics at the hip, knee, and ankle during a shod condition. Subjects were videotaped with a high speed camera while running a 5km at self-selected pace on a treadmill to determine natural foot strike pattern on day one. Preferred forefoot group (PFFG, n = 10) and preferred rear foot group (PRFG, n = 11) subjects were identified through slow motion video playback (n = 21, age = 22.8±2.2 years, mass = 73.1±14.5 kg, height 1.75 ± 0.10 m). On day two, subjects performed five overground run trials in both their natural and unnatural strike patterns while motion and force data were collected. Data were collected over two days so that foot strike videos could be analyzed for group placement purposes. Several 2 (Foot Strike Pattern -forefoot strike [FFS], rearfoot strike [RFS]) x 2 (Group - PFFG, PRFG) mixed model ANOVAs (p < 0.05) were run on speed, active peak vertical ground reaction force (VGRF), peak early stance and mid stance sagittal ankle moments, sagittal plane hip and knee moments, ankle dorsiflexion ROM, and sagittal plane hip and knee ROM. There were no significant interactions or between group differences for any of the measured variables. Within subject effects demonstrated that the RFS condition had significantly lower (VGRF) (RFS = 2.58 ± .21 BW, FFS = 2.71 ± 0.23 BW), dorsiflexion moment (RFS = -2.6 1± 0.61 Nm·kg(-1), FFS = -3.09 ± 0.32 Nm·kg(-1)), and dorsiflexion range of motion (RFS = 17.63 ± 3.76°, FFS = 22.10 ± 5.08°). There was also a significantly higher peak plantarflexion moment (RFS = 0.23 ± 0.11 Nm·kg(-1), FFS = 0.01 ± 0.01 Nm·kg(-1)), peak knee moment (RFS = 2.61 ± 0.54 Nm·kg(-1), FFS = 2.39 ± 0.61 Nm·kg(-1)), knee ROM (RFS = 31.72 ± 2.79°, FFS = 29.58 ± 2.97°), and hip ROM (RFS = 42.72 ± 4.03°, FFS = 41.38 ± 3.32°) as compared with the FFS condition. This research suggests that acute changes in foot strike patterns during shod running can create alterations in certain lower limb kinematic and kinetic measures that are not dependent on the preferred foot strike pattern of the individual. This research also challenges the contention that the impact transient spike in the vertical ground reaction force curve is only present during a rear foot strike type of running gait. Key pointsFootstrike pattern changes should be individually considered and implemented based on individual histories/abilitiesForefoot strike patterns increase external dorsiflexion momentsRearfoot strike patterns increase external knee flexion momentsRecreational shod runners are able to mimic habitual mechanics of different foot strike patterns.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Forefoot; joint moments; range of motion; rearfoot

Year:  2015        PMID: 25729311      PMCID: PMC4306776     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Sports Sci Med        ISSN: 1303-2968            Impact factor:   2.988


  27 in total

1.  Biomechanical analysis of the stance phase during barefoot and shod running.

Authors:  B De Wit; D De Clercq; P Aerts
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 2.712

2.  Foot strike patterns of recreational and sub-elite runners in a long-distance road race.

Authors:  Peter Larson; Erin Higgins; Justin Kaminski; Tamara Decker; Janine Preble; Daniela Lyons; Kevin McIntyre; Adam Normile
Journal:  J Sports Sci       Date:  2011-11-18       Impact factor: 3.337

3.  Foot strike patterns of runners at the 15-km point during an elite-level half marathon.

Authors:  Hiroshi Hasegawa; Takeshi Yamauchi; William J Kraemer
Journal:  J Strength Cond Res       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 3.775

4.  Forefoot running improves pain and disability associated with chronic exertional compartment syndrome.

Authors:  Angela R Diebal; Robert Gregory; Curtis Alitz; J Parry Gerber
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2012-03-16       Impact factor: 6.202

5.  Step frequency and lower extremity loading during running.

Authors:  H Hobara; T Sato; M Sakaguchi; T Sato; K Nakazawa
Journal:  Int J Sports Med       Date:  2012-03-01       Impact factor: 3.118

6.  Effects of step rate manipulation on joint mechanics during running.

Authors:  Bryan C Heiderscheit; Elizabeth S Chumanov; Max P Michalski; Christa M Wille; Michael B Ryan
Journal:  Med Sci Sports Exerc       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 5.411

7.  Barefoot-simulating footwear associated with metatarsal stress injury in 2 runners.

Authors:  Jeffrey Giuliani; Brendan Masini; Curtis Alitz; Brett D Owens
Journal:  Orthopedics       Date:  2011-07-07       Impact factor: 1.390

8.  Effects of fatigue on running mechanics associated with tibial stress fracture risk.

Authors:  Adam C Clansey; Michael Hanlon; Eric S Wallace; Mark J Lake
Journal:  Med Sci Sports Exerc       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 5.411

9.  Effects of foot strike on low back posture, shock attenuation, and comfort in running.

Authors:  Traci L Delgado; Emilia Kubera-Shelton; Robert R Robb; Robbin Hickman; Harvey W Wallmann; Janet S Dufek
Journal:  Med Sci Sports Exerc       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 5.411

10.  Foot strike patterns and ground contact times during high-calibre middle-distance races.

Authors:  Phil Hayes; Nicholas Caplan
Journal:  J Sports Sci       Date:  2012-08-02       Impact factor: 3.337

View more
  8 in total

1.  The Influence of a Bout of Exertion on Novice Barefoot Running Dynamics.

Authors:  Rami Hashish; Sachithra D Samarawickrame; Lucinda Baker; George J Salem
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2016-05-23       Impact factor: 2.988

2.  What are the Benefits and Risks Associated with Changing Foot Strike Pattern During Running? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Injury, Running Economy, and Biomechanics.

Authors:  Laura M Anderson; Daniel R Bonanno; Harvi F Hart; Christian J Barton
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2020-05       Impact factor: 11.136

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

Authors:  Alessandro Garofolini; Karen J Mickle; Patrick McLaughlin; Simon B Taylor
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-07-15       Impact factor: 4.996

4.  Effects of Foot Strike Techniques on Running Biomechanics: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yilin Xu; Peng Yuan; Ran Wang; Dan Wang; Jia Liu; Hui Zhou
Journal:  Sports Health       Date:  2020-08-19       Impact factor: 3.843

5.  Ankle Muscle Activations during Different Foot-Strike Patterns in Running.

Authors:  Jian-Zhi Lin; Wen-Yu Chiu; Wei-Hsun Tai; Yu-Xiang Hong; Chung-Yu Chen
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-14       Impact factor: 3.576

6.  Differences in sprinting performance and kinematics between preadolescent boys who are fore/mid and rear foot strikers.

Authors:  Aya Miyamoto; Tomonari Takeshita; Toshio Yanagiya
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-10-18       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 7.  Why forefoot striking in minimal shoes might positively change the course of running injuries.

Authors:  Irene S Davis; Hannah M Rice; Scott C Wearing
Journal:  J Sport Health Sci       Date:  2017-03-31       Impact factor: 7.179

8.  Lower between-limb asymmetry during running on treadmill compared to overground in subjects with laterally pronounced knee osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Jacques Robadey; Didier Staudenmann; Raphael Schween; Dominic Gehring; Albert Gollhofer; Wolfgang Taube
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-10-18       Impact factor: 3.240

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.