Relationship of Foot Strike Pattern and Landing Impacts during a Marathon
- 4 May 2019
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) in Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
- Vol. 51 (10), 2073-2079
- https://doi.org/10.1249/mss.0000000000002032
Abstract
Purpose Foot strike patterns (FSP) influence landing mechanics, with rearfoot strike (RFS) runners exhibiting higher impact loading than forefoot strike (FFS) runners. The few studies that included midfoot strike (MFS) runners have typically grouped them together with FFS. In addition, most running studies have been conducted in laboratories. Advances in wearable technology now allow the measurement of runners’ mechanics in their natural environment. The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between FSP and impacts across a marathon race. Methods A total of 222 healthy runners (119 males, 103 females; age, 44.1 ± 10.8 yr) running a marathon race were included. A treadmill assessment was undertaken to determine FSP. An ankle-mounted accelerometer recorded tibial shock (TS) over the course of the marathon. TS was compared between RFS, MFS, and FFS. Correlations between speed and impacts were examined between FSP. TS was also compared at the 10- and 40-km race points. Results RFS and MFS runners exhibited similar TS (12.24g ± 3.59g vs 11.82g ± 2.68g, P = 0.46) that was significantly higher (P < 0.001 and P < 0.01, respectively) than FFS runners (9.88g ± 2.51g). In addition, TS increased with speed for both RFS (r = 0.54, P = 0.01) and MFS (r = 0.42, P = 0.02) runners, but not FFS (r = 0.05, P = 0.83). Finally, both speed (P < 0.001) and TS (P < 0.001) were reduced between the 10- and the 40-km race points. However, when normalized for speed, TS was not different (P = 0.84). Conclusions RFS and MFS exhibit higher TS than FFS. In addition, RFS and MFS increase TS with speed, whereas FFS do not. These results suggest that the impact loading of MFS is more like RFS than FFS. Finally, TS, when normalized for speed, is similar between the beginning and the end of the race.This publication has 26 references indexed in Scilit:
- Footwear MattersMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 2016
- Biomechanical Differences of Foot-Strike Patterns During Running: A Systematic Review With Meta-analysisJournal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy, 2015
- Prospective comparison of running injuries between shod and barefoot runnersBritish Journal of Sports Medicine, 2015
- Kinematic and kinetic comparison of barefoot and shod running in mid/forefoot and rearfoot strike runnersGait & Posture, 2015
- Is the rearfoot pattern the most frequently foot strike pattern among recreational shod distance runners?Physical Therapy in Sport, 2015
- Foot Strike and Injury Rates in Endurance RunnersMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 2012
- Foot strike patterns of recreational and sub-elite runners in a long-distance road raceJournal of Sports Sciences, 2011
- Foot strike patterns and collision forces in habitually barefoot versus shod runnersNature, 2010
- Biomechanical and Anatomic Factors Associated with a History of Plantar Fasciitis in Female RunnersClinical Journal of Sport Medicine, 2009
- Biomechanical Factors Associated with Tibial Stress Fracture in Female RunnersMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 2006