Search

Background: Minimalist shoes have been popularized as a safe alternative to conventional running shoes. However, a paucity of research is available investigating the longer-term safety of minimalist shoes. Purpose: To compare running-related pain and injury between minimalist and conventional shoes in trained runners and to investigate interactions between shoe type, body mass, and weekly training distance. Study Design: Randomized clinical trial; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Sixty-one trained, habitual rearfoot footfall runners (mean ± SD: body mass, 74.6 ± 9.3 kg; weekly training distance, 25 ± 14 km) were randomly allocated to either minimalist or conventional shoes. Runners gradually increased the time spent running in their allocated shoes over 26 weeks. Running-related pain intensity was measured weekly by use of 100-mm visual analog scales. Time to first running-related injury was also assessed. Results: Interactions were found between shoe type and weekly training distance for weekly running-related pain; greater pain was experienced with minimalist shoes (P < .05), and clinically meaningful increases (>10 mm) were noted when the weekly training distance was more than 35 km/wk. Eleven of 30 runners sustained an injury in conventional shoes compared with 16 of 31 runners in minimalist shoes (hazard ratio, 1.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.63-4.27; P = .31). A shoe × body mass interaction was found for time to first running-related injury (P = .01). For runners using minimalist shoes, relative to runners using conventional shoes, the risk of sustaining an injury became more likely with increasing body mass above 71.4 kg, and the risk was moderately increased (hazard ratio, 2.00; 95% confidence interval, 1.10-3.66; P = .02) for runners using minimalist shoes who had a body mass of 85.7 kg. Conclusions: Runners should limit weekly training distance in minimalist shoes to avoid running-related pain. Heavier runners are at greater risk of injury when running in minimalist shoes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this study was to determine if minimalist shoes improve time trial performance of trained distance runners and if changes in running economy, shoe mass, stride length, stride rate and footfall pattern were related to any difference in performance. Twenty-six trained runners performed three 6-min sub-maximal treadmill runs at 11, 13 and 15 km·h−1in minimalist and conventional shoes while running economy, stride length, stride rate and footfall pattern were assessed. They then performed a 5-km time trial. In the minimalist shoe, runners completed the trial in less time (effect size 0.20 ± 0.12), were more economical during sub-maximal running (effect size 0.33 ± 0.14) and decreased stride length (effect size 0.22 ± 0.10) and increased stride rate (effect size 0.22 ± 0.11). All but one runner ran with a rearfoot footfall in the minimalist shoe. Improvements in time trial performance were associated with improvements in running economy at 15 km·h−1(r = 0.58), with 79% of the improved economy accounted for by reduced shoe mass (P < 0.05). The results suggest that running in minimalist shoes improves running economy and 5-km running performance. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background: The effect of footwear on running economy has been investigated in numerous studies. However, no systematic review and meta-analysis has synthesised the available literature and the effect of footwear on running performance is not known. Objective: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the effect of footwear on running performance and running economy in distance runners, by reviewing controlled trials that compare different footwear conditions or compare footwear with barefoot. Methods: The Web of Science, Scopus, MEDLINE, CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), EMBASE, AMED (Allied and Complementary Medicine), CINAHL and SPORTDiscus databases were searched from inception up until April 2014. Included articles reported on controlled trials that examined the effects of footwear or footwear characteristics (including shoe mass, cushioning, motion control, longitudinal bending stiffness, midsole viscoelasticity, drop height and comfort) on running performance or running economy and were published in a peer-reviewed journal. Results: Of the 1,044 records retrieved, 19 studies were included in the systematic review and 14 studies were included in the meta-analysis. No studies were identified that reported effects on running performance. Individual studies reported significant, but trivial, beneficial effects on running economy for comfortable and stiff-soled shoes [standardised mean difference (SMD) <0.12; P < 0.05), a significant small beneficial effect on running economy for cushioned shoes (SMD = 0.37; P < 0.05) and a significant moderate beneficial effect on running economy for training in minimalist shoes (SMD = 0.79; P < 0.05). Meta-analysis found significant small beneficial effects on running economy for light shoes and barefoot compared with heavy shoes (SMD < 0.34; P < 0.01) and for minimalist shoes compared with conventional shoes (SMD = 0.29; P < 0.01). A significant positive association between shoe mass and metabolic cost of running was identified ( P < 0.01). Footwear with a combined shoe mass less than 440 g per pair had no detrimental effect on running economy. Conclusions: Certain models of footwear and footwear characteristics can improve running economy. Future research in footwear performance should include measures of running performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]