Literature DB >> 25931271

Effects of unweighting and speed on in-shoe regional loading during running on a lower body positive pressure treadmill.

James M Smoliga1, Leah Anne Wirfel2, Danielle Paul2, Mary Doarnberger2, Kevin R Ford3.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine how unweighted running on a lower body positive pressure treadmill (LBPPT) modifies in-shoe regional loading. Ten experienced runners were fit with pressure distribution measurement insoles and ran at 100%, 120%, and 140% of self-reported easy training pace on a LBPPT at 20%, 40%, 60%, 80%, and 100% body weight percentage settings (BWSet). Speeds and BWSet were in random order. A linear mixed effect model (p<0.05 significance level) was used to compare differences in whole foot and regional maximum in-shoe plantar force (FMAX), impulse, and relative load distribution across speeds and BWSet. There were significant main effects (p<0.001) for running speed and BWSet for whole foot Fmax and impulse. The model revealed 1.4% and 0.24% increases in whole foot FMAX (times body weight) and impulse, respectively, for every unit increase in body weight percentage. There was a significant main effect for BWSet on Fmax and relative load (p<0.05) for each of the nine foot regions examined, though four regions were not different between 80% and 100% BWSet. There was a significant (p<0.001) main effect for BWSet on forefoot to rear foot relative load. Linear relationships were found between increases in BWSet and increases in-shoe Fmax and impulse, resulting from regional changes in foot pressure which represent a shift towards forefoot loading, most evident <80% BWSet. Estimating in-shoe regional loading parameters may be useful during rehabilitation and training to appropriately prescribe specific speed and body weight levels, without exceeding certain critical peak force levels while running.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:  Overuse injury rehabilitation; Running; Stress fracture; Treadmill; Unloading; Unweighting

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25931271     DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2015.04.009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomech        ISSN: 0021-9290            Impact factor:   2.712


  7 in total

Review 1.  Physiological and Biomechanical Responses to Running on Lower Body Positive Pressure Treadmills in Healthy Populations.

Authors:  Kathryn A Farina; Alexis A Wright; Kevin R Ford; Leah Anne Wirfel; James M Smoliga
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 11.136

Review 2.  Comprehensive Return to Competitive Distance Running: A Clinical Commentary.

Authors:  Eric J Hegedus; Lindsey Ickes; Franziska Jakobs; Kevin R Ford; James M Smoliga
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2021-09-03       Impact factor: 11.136

3.  An anatomically-based masking protocol for the assessment of in-shoe plantar pressure measurement of the forefoot.

Authors:  Saeed Forghany; Daniel R Bonanno; Hylton B Menz; Karl B Landorf
Journal:  J Foot Ankle Res       Date:  2018-06-15       Impact factor: 2.303

4.  Effect of speed and gradient on plantar force when running on an AlterG® treadmill.

Authors:  Athol Thomson; Rodney Whiteley; Clint Hansen; Julius Welzel; Sebastien Racinais; Mathew G Wilson
Journal:  BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil       Date:  2021-03-30

5.  Role of Antigravity Training in Rehabilitation and Return to Sport After Running Injuries.

Authors:  Heather K Vincent; Aimee Madsen; Kevin R Vincent
Journal:  Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil       Date:  2022-01-28

6.  Physiological and Biomechanical Responses of Highly Trained Distance Runners to Lower-Body Positive Pressure Treadmill Running.

Authors:  Kyle R Barnes; Jessica N Janecke
Journal:  Sports Med Open       Date:  2017-11-21

7.  Run Economy on a Normal and Lower Body Positive Pressure Treadmill.

Authors:  Corey Temple; Erik Lind; Deborah VAN Langen; Larissa True; Saige Hupman; James F Hokanson
Journal:  Int J Exerc Sci       Date:  2017-09-01
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.