Literature DB >> 32390732

The Association Between Rearfoot Motion While Barefoot and Shod in Different Types of Running Shoes in Recreational Runners.

Érica Q Silva1, Andreia N Miana2, Jane S S P Ferreira1, Henry D Kiyomoto3, Mauro C M E Dinato2, Isabel C N Sacco1.   

Abstract

The rearfoot angle (RFA) is a biomechanical variable widely used to determine the rearfoot motion (RM). Shoe manufacturers began to develop running shoes with RM control that would supposedly alter foot-ground interaction mechanics and neutralize excessive pronation or supination; moreover, some studies have not shown differences in rearfoot motion in shod condition compared to barefoot. This study intended to answer three questions: Do the shoes runners wear correspond to their respective barefoot RM? Does the eversion angle change during shod running, regardless the shoes worn? Can footwear designed for a specific RM (supination, pronation, neutral) correct or neutralize the eversion angle of runners? One hundred and eleven runners (38.6 ± 9.7years; 74.9 ± 12.0kg; 1.74 ± 0.08 m), who ran an average of 32 ± 17km/week, were included in this cross-sectional study. They had their RFA measured by a motion capture system when running barefoot and wearing their habitual running shoes (shod condition). Chi-squared test was used to assess associations between barefoot and shod condition and RFA was compared between conditions using Wilcoxon tests (p = 0.05). There was no association between the type of running shoe and barefoot RM (p > 0.05). There was an association between RFA when barefoot and when shod (p < 0.05). Among all participants classified as neutral, 61% continued to exhibit a normal/neutral RFA when wearing their habitual shoes. Among the overpronators, 100% showed a change in the RM to either normal or supinator. Among the participants classified as supinators, 62% exhibited normal pronation when shod even without using the appropriate footwear, claimed by the manufacturer. Only 44.1% of the sample chose the correct running shoe for their barefoot RM. The majority of runners did not choose their shoes designed for their natural type of RM. The rearfoot eversion angle changed an average 4 degrees when running shod and the RM barefoot altered quite a lot when using a running shoe. The running shoes did not correct the pronation detected barefoot, as claimed by the manufacturers. © Journal of Sports Science and Medicine.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Running; biomechanics; footwear; kinematics; rearfoot motion

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32390732      PMCID: PMC7196748     

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


  42 in total

1.  Influences of inversion/eversion of the foot upon impact loading during locomotion.

Authors:  S D Perry; M A Lafortune
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  1995-07       Impact factor: 2.063

2.  A description of training characteristics and its association with previous musculoskeletal injuries in recreational runners: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Luiz C Hespanhol Junior; Leonardo O P Costa; Aline C A Carvalho; Alexandre D Lopes
Journal:  Rev Bras Fisioter       Date:  2012 Jan-Feb

3.  The effects of shoes on the torsion and rearfoot motion in running.

Authors:  A Stacoff; X Kälin; E Stüssi
Journal:  Med Sci Sports Exerc       Date:  1991-04       Impact factor: 5.411

4.  A comparative biomechanical analysis of habitually unshod and shod runners based on a foot morphological difference.

Authors:  Qichang Mei; Justin Fernandez; Weijie Fu; Neng Feng; Yaodong Gu
Journal:  Hum Mov Sci       Date:  2015-05-15       Impact factor: 2.161

5.  Is Achilles tendon blood flow related to foot pronation?

Authors:  E Wezenbeek; T M Willems; N Mahieu; I Van Caekenberghe; E Witvrouw; D De Clercq
Journal:  Scand J Med Sci Sports       Date:  2017-02-24       Impact factor: 4.221

Review 6.  Proximal and distal contributions to lower extremity injury: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Vivienne H Chuter; Xanne A K Janse de Jonge
Journal:  Gait Posture       Date:  2012-03-21       Impact factor: 2.840

Review 7.  Barefoot running: biomechanics and implications for running injuries.

Authors:  Allison R Altman; Irene S Davis
Journal:  Curr Sports Med Rep       Date:  2012 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 1.733

8.  Multi-segment foot kinematics and ground reaction forces during gait of individuals with plantar fasciitis.

Authors:  Ryan Chang; Pedro A Rodrigues; Richard E A Van Emmerik; Joseph Hamill
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2014-06-11       Impact factor: 2.712

9.  A prospective study of running injuries: the Vancouver Sun Run "In Training" clinics.

Authors:  J E Taunton; M B Ryan; D B Clement; D C McKenzie; D R Lloyd-Smith; B D Zumbo
Journal:  Br J Sports Med       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 13.800

10.  A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Crossover Studies Comparing Physiological, Perceptual and Performance Measures Between Treadmill and Overground Running.

Authors:  Jayme R Miller; Bas Van Hooren; Chris Bishop; Jonathan D Buckley; Richard W Willy; Joel T Fuller
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 11.136

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.