Search

"Super-shoes" are designed to improve endurance running performance by reducing the metabolic demands of running. Although the research on "super-shoes" is still developing and has mostly been studied in male runners, it is not clear how possible mediating factors, such as foot strike pattern, influence the metabolic cost and joint mechanics in competitive female runners. Purpose: The objective of this study is to assess the influence of "super-shoes" on metabolic cost and joint mechanics in competitive female runners and to understand how foot strike patter may influence the footwear effects. Methods: Eighteen competitive female runners ran four 5-min bouts on a force instrumented treadmill at 12.9 km⋅h-1 in 1) Nike Vaporfly Next% 2™(SUPER) and 2) Nike Pegasus 38™(CON) in a randomized and mirrored order. Results: Metabolic power was improved by 4.2% (P < 0.001; d = 0.43) and metatarsophalangeal (MTP) negative work (P < 0.001; d = 1.22), ankle negative work (P = 0.001; d = 0.67), and ankle positive work (P < 0.001; d = 0.97) were all smaller when running in SUPER compared with CON. There was no correlation between foot strike pattern and the between-shoe (CON to SUPER) percentage change for metabolic power (r = 0.093, P = 0.715). Conclusions: Metabolic power improved by 4.2% in "super-shoes" (but only by ~3.2% if controlling for shoe mass differences) in this cohort of competitive female runners, which is a smaller improvement than previously observed in men. The reduced mechanical demand at the MTP and ankle in "super-shoes" are consistent with previous literature and may explain or contribute to the metabolic improvements observed in "super-shoes"; however, foot strike pattern was not a moderating factor for the metabolic improvements of "super-shoes." Future studies should directly compare the metabolic response among different types of "super-shoes" between men and women. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction/purpose: Previous results about shoe longitudinal bending stiffness (LBS) and running economy (RE) show high variability. This study aimed to assess the effects of shoes with increased LBS on RE and performance in trained and national runners. Methods: Twenty-eight male runners were divided into two groups according to their 10-km performance times (trained, 38-45 min and national runners, <34 min). Subjects ran 2 - 3 min (at 9 and 13 km·h-1 for trained, and 13 and 17 km·h-1 for national runners) with an experimental shoe with carbon fiber plate to increase the LBS (Increased LBS) and a control shoe (without carbon fiber plate). We measured energy cost of running (W·kg-1) and spatiotemporal parameters in visit one and participants performed a 3000 m time trial (TT) in two successive visits. Results: Increased LBS improved RE in the trained group at slow (11.41 ± 0.93 W·kg-1 vs 11.86 ± 0.93 W·kg-1) and fast velocity (15.89 ± 1.24 W·kg--1 vs 16.39 ± 1.24 W·kg-1) and only at the fast velocity in the national group (20.35 ± 1.45 W·kg-1 vs 20.78 ± 1.18 W·kg-1). The improvements in RE were accompanied by different changes in biomechanical variables between groups. There were a similar improvement in the 3000 m TT test in Increased LBS for trained (639 ± 59 vs 644 ± 61 s in control shoes) and national runners (569 ± 21 vs 574 ± 21 s in control shoes)withmore constant pace in increased LBS compared with control shoes in both groups. Conclusions: Increasing shoe LBS improved RE at slow and fast velocities in trained runners and only at fast velocity in national runners. However, the 3000m TT test improved similarly in both levels of runners with increased LBS. The improvements in RE are accompanied by small modifications in running kinematics that could explain the difference between the different levels of runners. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Optimization of gait rehabilitation using split-belt treadmills critically depends on our understanding of the roles of somatosensory perception and sensorimotor recalibration in perceiving gait asymmetry and adapting to split-belt walking. Recent evidence justifies the hypothesis that perception of gait asymmetry is based mainly on detection of temporal mismatches between afferent inputs at the spinal level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Our goal was to quantify if small (1%-3%) changes in running economy quantitatively affect distance-running performance. Based on the linear relationship between metabolic rate and running velocity and on earlier observations that added shoe mass increases metabolic rate by ~1% per 100 g per shoe, we hypothesized that adding 100 and 300 g per shoe would slow 3000-m time-trial performance by 1% and 3%, respectively. Methods: Eighteen male sub-20-min 5-km runners completed treadmill testing, and three 3000-m time trials wearing control shoes and identical shoes with 100 and 300 g of discreetly added mass. We measured rates of oxygen consumption and carbon dioxide production and calculated metabolic rates for the treadmill tests, and we recorded overall running time for the time trials. Results: Adding mass to the shoes significantly increased metabolic rate at 3.5 m⋅s-1 by 1.11% per 100 g per shoe (95% confidence interval = 0.88%-1.35%). While wearing the control shoes, participants ran the 3000-m time trial in 626.1 ± 55.6 s. Times averaged 0.65% ± 1.36% and 2.37% ± 2.09% slower for the +100-g and +300-g shoes, respectively (P < 0.001). On the basis of a linear fit of all the data, 3000-m time increased 0.78% per added 100 g per shoe (95% confidence interval = 0.52%-1.04%). Conclusion: Adding shoe mass predictably degrades running economy and slows 3000-m time-trial performance proportionally. Our data demonstrate that laboratory-based running economy measurements can accurately predict changes in distance-running race performance due to shoe modifications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Backward locomotion is used increasingly in sports and rehabilitation. However, it is unclear whether training effects of backward walking (BW)/backward running (BR) can be transferred simply to forward walking (FW)/forward running (FR). This touches on the question whether the same neural substrate can generate FW and BW. The available evidence suggests that BW uses the same rhythm circuitry but additionally requires specialized control circuits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]