“Excessive” pronation is often implicated as a risk factor for anterior knee pain (AKP). The amount deemed excessive is typically calculated using the means and standard deviations reported in the literature. However, when using this method, few studies find an association between pronation and AKP. An alternative method of defining excessive pronation is to use the joints’ available range of motion (ROM). The purposes of this study were to (1) evaluate pronation in the context of the joints’ ROM and (2) compare this method to traditional pronation variables in healthy and injured runners. Thirty-six runners (19 healthy, 17 AKP) had their passive pronation ROM measured using a custom-built device and a motion capture system. Dynamic pronation angles during running were captured and compared with the available ROM. In addition, traditional pronation variables were evaluated. No significant differences in traditional pronation variables were noted between healthy and injured runners. In contrast, injured runners used significantly more of their available ROM, maintaining a 4.21° eversion buffer, whereas healthy runners maintained a 7.25° buffer (P = .03, ES = 0.77). Defining excessive pronation in the context of the joints’ available ROM may be a better method of defining excessive pronation and distinguishing those at risk for injury.
Pedro Rodrigues, Trampas TenBroek and Joseph Hamill
Pedro Rodrigues, Ryan Chang, Trampas TenBroek, Richard van Emmerik and Joseph Hamill
Excessive pronation, because of its coupling with tibial internal rotation (TIR), has been implicated as a risk factor in the development of anterior knee pain (AKP). Traditionally, this coupling has been expressed as a ratio between the eversion range of motion and the TIR range of motion (Ev/TIR) that occurs during stance. Currently, this technique has not been used to evaluate specific injuries or the effects of sex. In addition, Ev/TIR is incapable of detecting coupling changes that occur throughout stance. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare the coupling between eversion and TIR in runners with (n = 19) and without AKP (n = 17) and across sex using the Ev/TIR ratio, and more continuously using vector coding. When using vector coding, significant coupling differences were noted in runners with AKP (34% to 38% stance), with runners with AKP showing relatively more TIR than eversion. Similarly significant differences were noted across sex (14%–25% and 36%–47% stance), with males transitioning from a loading to propulsive coordination pattern using a proximal to distal strategy, and female runners using a distal to proximal strategy. These differences were only detected when evaluating this coupling relationship using a continuous technique such as vector coding.
Trampas M. TenBroek, Pedro A. Rodrigues, Edward C. Frederick and Joseph Hamill
The purpose of this study was to: (1) investigate how kinematic patterns are adjusted while running in footwear with THIN, MEDIUM, and THICK midsole thicknesses and (2) determine if these patterns are adjusted over time during a sustained run in footwear of different thicknesses. Ten male heel-toe runners performed treadmill runs in specially constructed footwear (THIN, MEDIUM, and THICK midsoles) on separate days. Standard lower extremity kinematics and acceleration at the tibia and head were captured. Time epochs were created using data from every 5 minutes of the run. Repeated-measures ANOVA was used (P < .05) to determine differences across footwear and time. At touchdown, kinematics were similar for the THIN and MEDIUM conditions distal to the knee, whereas only the THIN condition was isolated above the knee. No runners displayed midfoot or forefoot strike patterns in any condition. Peak accelerations were slightly increased with THIN and MEDIUM footwear as was eversion, as well as tibial and thigh internal rotation. It appears that participants may have been anticipating, very early in their run, a suitable kinematic pattern based on both the length of the run and the footwear condition.