To date there is a paucity of information about how different types of conventional running shoes influence lower limb kinematics. The aim of the study was to determine the influence of motion control, neutral, and cushioned running shoes upon lower limb kinematics. Twenty-eight active males completed one test session running in standardized motion control, neutral, and cushioned running shoes on a treadmill at a self-selected pace (2.9 [0.6] m·s−1). Kinematic data were collected using a VICON motion analysis system with hip, knee, and ankle joint angles calculated. Discrete parameters associated with stance phase kinematics were compared between footwear conditions. Significant (P < .05) differences in knee flexion and internal rotation at toe off, and knee adduction range of motion were reported between footwear conditions. Significant (P < .05) differences in ankle joint dorsiflexion and adduction upon initial contact, peak dorsiflexion, eversion and abduction, and inversion at toe off were reported between footwear conditions. The influence of motion control, neutral, and cushioned running shoes on joint function dissipates moving proximally, with larger changes reported at the ankle compared with knee and hip joints. Although significant differences were reported between footwear conditions, these changes were of a small magnitude and effect size.
Ben Langley, Mary Cramp and Stewart C. Morrison
Ben Langley, Nick Knight and Stewart C. Morrison
Medial tibial stress syndrome (MTSS) is a common running-related injury. Alterations in movement patterns and movement coordination patterns have been linked to the development of overuse injuries. The aim of this study was to compare transverse plane tibial and frontal plane rearfoot motion and the coordination of these movements between runners with MTSS and healthy controls. A total of 10 recreational runners with MTSS and 10 healthy controls ran at 11 km/h on a treadmill. A 3-camera motion analysis system operating at 200 Hz was used to calculate tibia and rearfoot motion. Stance phase motion patterns were compared between groups using multivariate analysis, specifically, Hotelling T2 test with statistical parametric mapping. A modified vector coding technique was used to classify the coordination of transverse plane tibial and frontal plane rearfoot motion. The frequency of each coordination pattern displayed by each group was compared using independent samples t tests. Individuals with MTSS displayed significantly (P = .037, d = 1.00) more antiphase coordination (tibial internal rotation with rearfoot inversion) despite no significant (P > .05) differences in stance phase kinematics. The increased antiphase movement may increase the torsional stress placed upon the medial aspect of the tibia, contributing to the development of MTSS.