Search

Running style is temporally defined by a duty factor and stride frequency and believed to be related to the loading experienced during ever step. However, the exact relationship between both temporal variables and loading magnitude is still unknown. We aimed to identify the relationship between a duty factor and stride frequency with external load measures, joint reaction forces and joint moments. Thirty-one healthy female recreational runners ran across a 25-m runway at a speed of 2.30 ± 0.05 m·s -1 . Ground reaction forces and motion capture data were used to determine the maximal vertical ground reaction force, the vertical instantaneous loading rate, peak braking force, peak joint extension moments and peak joint reaction forces at the knee and the ankle. The habitual duty factor and stride frequency of runners did not correlate with each other. The duty factor was found to be a significant predictor of maximal vertical ground reaction force (R 2 = 0.585), peak braking force (R 2 = 0.153), peak knee extension moment (R 2 = 0.149), ankle plantar flexion moment (R 2 = 0.225) and peak joint reaction forces at the knee (R 2 = 0.591) and the ankle (R 2 = 0.592), but not of the vertical instantaneous loading rate. Stride frequency had no significant predictive value. In conclusion, the maximal loading and potential injury risk of female recreational runners running with high duty factors are lower compared to those of peers running with lower duty factors., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright: © Academy of Physical Education in Katowice.)

Purpose: The present study aimed to determine whether runners can reduce impact measures after a six-session in-the-field gait retraining program with real-time musical biofeedback on axial peak tibial acceleration (PTA a ) and identify the associated biomechanical adaptations., Methods: Twenty trained high-impact runners were assigned to either the biofeedback or the music-only condition. The biofeedback group received real-time feedback on the PTA a during the gait retraining program, whereas the music-only condition received a sham treatment. Three-dimensional gait analysis was conducted in the laboratory before (PRE) and within one week after completing the gait retraining program (POST). Subjects were instructed to replicate the running style from the last gait retraining session without receiving feedback while running overground at a constant speed of 2.9 m∙s -1 ., Results: Only the biofeedback group showed significant reductions in both PTA a (∆x̅ = -26.9%, p = 0.006) and vertical instantaneous loading rate (∆x̅ = -29.2%, p = 0.003) from PRE to POST. In terms of biomechanical adaptations, two strategies were identified. Two subjects transitioned toward a more forefoot strike. The remaining eight subjects used a pronounced rearfoot strike and posteriorly inclined shank at initial contact combined with less knee extension at toe-off while reducing vertical excursion of the center of mass., Conclusions: After completing a music-based biofeedback gait retraining program, runners can reduce impact while running overground in a laboratory. We identified two distinct self-selected strategies used by the participants to achieve reductions in impact., (© 2022 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Literature shows that running on an accelerated motorized treadmill is mechanically different from accelerated running overground. Overground, the subject has to enlarge the net anterior-posterior force impulse proportional to acceleration in order to overcome linear whole body inertia, whereas on a treadmill, this force impulse remains zero, regardless of belt acceleration. Therefore, it can be expected that changes in kinematics and joint kinetics of the human body also are proportional to acceleration overground, whereas no changes according to belt acceleration are expected on a treadmill. This study documents kinematics and joint kinetics of accelerated running overground and running on an accelerated motorized treadmill belt for 10 young healthy subjects. When accelerating overground, ground reaction forces are characterized by less braking and more propulsion, generating a more forward-oriented ground reaction force vector and a more forwardly inclined body compared with steady-state running. This change in body orientation as such is partly responsible for the changed force direction. Besides this, more pronounced hip and knee flexion at initial contact, a larger hip extension velocity, smaller knee flexion velocity and smaller initial plantarflexion velocity are associated with less braking. A larger knee extension and plantarflexion velocity result in larger propulsion. Altogether, during stance, joint moments are not significantly influenced by acceleration overground. Therefore, we suggest that the overall behaviour of the musculoskeletal system (in terms of kinematics and joint moments) during acceleration at a certain speed remains essentially identical to steady-state running at the same speed, yet acting in a different orientation. However, because acceleration implies extra mechanical work to increase the running speed, muscular effort done (in terms of power output) must be larger. This is confirmed by larger joint power generation at the level of the hip and lower power absorption at the knee as the result of subtle differences in joint velocity. On a treadmill, ground reaction forces are not influenced by acceleration and, compared with overground, virtually no kinesiological adaptations to an accelerating belt are observed. Consequently, adaptations to acceleration during running differ from treadmill to overground and should be studied in the condition of interest.