Differences in Peak Impact Accelerations Among Foot Strike Patterns in Recreational Runners
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 13130040 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Christopher Napier (0000-0002-1454-3546, University of British Columbia), Lauren Fridman, Paul Blazey (0000-0002-8149-9514, University of British Columbia), Nicholas Trân, Tom Michie (0000-0002-5456-0914, Simon Fraser University), Amy Schneeberg (0000-0002-3913-7202) |
| Year | 2022 |
| Volume | 4 |
| Pages | 802019-802019 |
| Publication date | 2022-03-04 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Frontiers in Sports and Active Living (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2624-9367 • E-ISSN: 2624-9367 |
| Publisher | Frontiers Media (PUBLISHER • CH) |
| DOI | 10.3389/fspor.2022.802019 |
| PMID | 35308593 |
| OpenAlex | W4214822061 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 47 |
Introduction Running-related injuries (RRIs) occur from a combination of training load errors and aberrant biomechanics. Impact loading, measured by peak acceleration, is an important measure of running biomechanics that is related to RRI. Foot strike patterns may moderate the magnitude of impact load in runners. The effect of foot strike pattern on peak acceleration has been measured using tibia-mounted inertial measurement units (IMUs), but not commercially available insole-embedded IMUs. The aim of this study was to compare the peak acceleration signal associated with rearfoot (RFS), midfoot (MFS), and forefoot (FFS) strike patterns when measured with an insole-embedded IMU. Materials and Methods Healthy runners ran on a treadmill for 1 min at three different speeds with their habitual foot strike pattern. An insole-embedded IMU was placed inside standardized neutral cushioned shoes to measure the peak resultant, vertical, and anteroposterior accelerations at impact. The Foot strike pattern was determined by two experienced observers and evaluated using high-speed video. Linear effect mixed-effect models were used to quantify the relationship between foot strike pattern and peak resultant, vertical, and anteroposterior acceleration. Results A total of 81% of the 187 participants exhibited an RFS pattern. An RFS pattern was associated with a higher peak resultant (0.29 SDs; p = 0.029) and vertical (1.19 SD; p < 0.001) acceleration when compared with an FFS running pattern, when controlling for speed and limb, respectively. However, an MFS was associated with the highest peak accelerations in the resultant direction (0.91 SD vs. FFS; p = 0.002 and 0.17 SD vs. RFS; p = 0.091). An FFS pattern was associated with the lowest peak accelerations in both the resultant and vertical directions. An RFS was also associated with a significantly greater peak acceleration in the anteroposterior direction (0.28 SD; p = 0.033) than an FFS pattern, while there was no difference between MFS and FFS patterns. Conclusion Our findings indicate that runners should be grouped by RFS, MFS, and FFS when comparing peak acceleration, rather than the common practice of grouping MFS and FFS together as non-RFS runners. Future studies should aim to determine the risk of RRI associated with peak accelerations from an insole-embedded IMU to understand whether the small observed differences in this study are clinically meaningful
Acceleration · Accelerometer · Biomechanics · Foot (prosody · Forefoot · Gait · Geodesy · Inertial measurement unit · Physical medicine and rehabilitation · Physical therapy · Physics · Simulation · Treadmill · Diabetic Foot Ulcer Assessment and Management · Engineering · Foot and Ankle Surgery · Lower Extremity Biomechanics and Pathologies · Mathematics · Medicine · Anatomy · Geology · Surgery
| Highly cited | No |
|---|