Download PDF
Int J Sports Med 2017; 38(10): 770-775
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-114863
Orthopedics & Biomechanics
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Habitual Minimalist Shod Running Biomechanics and the Acute Response to Running Barefoot

Nicholas Tam
1   Division of Exercise Science and Sports Medicine, Department of Human Biology, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa
,
Ian A. J. Darragh
2   School of Health and Human Performance, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland
,
Nikhil V. Divekar
1   Division of Exercise Science and Sports Medicine, Department of Human Biology, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa
,
Robert P. Lamberts
1   Division of Exercise Science and Sports Medicine, Department of Human Biology, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa
3   Institute of Sport and Exercise Medicine, Department of Surgical Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Tygerberg, South Africa
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History



accepted after revision 12 June 2017

Publication Date:
02 August 2017 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

The aim of the study was to determine whether habitual minimalist shoe runners present with purported favorable running biomechanithat reduce running injury risk such as initial loading rate. Eighteen minimalist and 16 traditionally cushioned shod runners were assessed when running both in their preferred training shoe and barefoot. Ankle and knee joint kinetics and kinematics, initial rate of loading, and footstrike angle were measured. Sagittal ankle and knee joint stiffness were also calculated. Results of a two-factor ANOVA presented no group difference in initial rate of loading when participants were running either shod or barefoot; however, initial loading rate increased for both groups when running barefoot (p=0.008). Differences in footstrike angle were observed between groups when running shod, but not when barefoot (minimalist:8.71±8.99 vs. traditional: 17.32±11.48 degrees, p=0.002). Lower ankle joint stiffness was found in both groups when running barefoot (p=0.025). These findings illustrate that risk factors for injury potentially differ between the two groups. Shoe construction differences do change mechanical demands, however, once habituated to the demands of a given shoe condition, certain acute favorable or unfavorable responses may be moderated. The purported benefits of minimalist running shoes in mimicking habitual barefoot running is questioned, and risk of injury may not be attenuated.

Key words

running - gait - exercise - footwear
 

  • References

  • 1 Bonacci J, Saunders PU, Hicks A, Rantalainen T, Vicenzino BGT, Spratford W. Running in a minimalist and lightweight shoe is not the same as running barefoot: A biomechanical study. Br J Sports Med 2013; 47: 387-392
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Boyer KA, Nigg BM. Muscle activity in the leg is tuned in response to impact force characteristics. J Biomech 2004; 37: 1583-1588
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Burr DB, Martin RB, Schaffler MB, Radin EL. Bone remodeling in response to in vivo fatigue microdamage. J Biomech 1985; 18: 189-200
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Butler RJ, Crowell HP, Davis IM. Lower extremity stiffness: Implications for performance and injury. Clin Biomech 2003; 18: 511-517
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Chambon N, Delattre N, Berton E, Gueguen N, Rao G. The effect of shoe drop on running pattern. Footwear Sci 2013; 5: S106-S107
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Chambon N, Delattre N, Guéguen N, Berton E, Rao G. Is midsole thickness a key parameter for the running pattern?. Gait Posture 2014; 40: 58-63
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Daoud AI, Geissler GJ, Wang F, Saretsky J, Daoud YA, Lieberman DE. Foot strike and injury rates in endurance runners: A retrospective study. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2012; 44: 1325-1334
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Esculier J-F, Dubois B, Dionne CE, Leblond J, Roy J-S. A consensus definition and rating scale for minimalist shoes. J Foot Ankle Res 2015; 8: 42
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Eskofier BM, Kraus M, Worobets JT, Stefanyshyn DJ, Nigg BM. Pattern classification of kinematic and kinetic running data to distinguish gender, shod/barefoot and injury groups with feature ranking. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin 2012; 15: 467-474
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Grood ES, Suntay WJ. A joint coordinate system for the clinical description of three-dimensional motions: Application to the knee. J Biomech Eng 1983; 105: 136-144
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Hamill J, Gruber AH, Derrick TR. Lower extremity joint stiffness characteristics during running with different footfall patterns. Eur J Sport Sci 2014; 14: 130-136
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Harriss DJ, Atkinson G. Ethical standards in sport and exercise science research: 2016 update. Int J Sports Med 2016; 36: 1121-1124
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Hopkins WG, Marshall SW, Batterham AM, Hanin J. Progressive statistics for studies in sports medicine and exercise science. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2009; 41: 3-13
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Kadaba MP, Ramakrishnan HK, Wootten ME. Measurement of lower extremity kinematics during level walking. J Orthop Res 1990; 8: 383-392
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Lieberman DE. What we can learn about running from barefoot running: An evolutionary medical perspective. Exerc Sport Sci Rev 2012; 40: 63-72
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Lieberman DE, Venkadesan M, Werbel WA, Daoud AI, D’Andrea S, Davis IS, Mang’eni RO, Pitsiladis Y. Foot strike patterns and collision forces in habitually barefoot versus shod runners. Nature 2010; 463: 531-535
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 McCarthy C, Fleming N, Donne B, Blanksby B. 12 weeks of simulated barefoot running changes foot-strike patterns in female runners. Int J Sports Med 2014; 35: 443-450
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Nigg B, Baltich J, Hoerzer S, Enders H. Running shoes and running injuries: Mythbusting and a proposal for two new paradigms: “preferred movement path” and “comfort filter”. Br J Sports Med 2015; bjsports-2015-095054
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Nigg BM, De Boer RW, Fisher V. A kinematic comparison of overground and treadmill running. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1995; 27: 98-105
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Perkins KP, Hanney WJ, Rothschild CE. The risks and benefits of running barefoot or in minimalist shoes: A systematic review. Sports Health 2014; 6: 475-480
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Rice HM, Jamison ST, Davis IS. Footwear matters: Influence of footwear and foot strike on load rates during running. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2016; 48: 2462-2468
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Ridge ST, Johnson AW, Mitchell UH, Hunter I, Robinson E, Rich BSE, Brown SD. Foot bone marrow edema after a 10-wk transition to minimalist running shoes. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2013; 45: 1363-1368
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Shih Y, Lin K-L, Shiang T-Y. Is the foot striking pattern more important than barefoot or shod conditions in running?. Gait Posture 2013; 38: 490-494
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Squadrone R, Gallozzi C. Biomechanical and physiological comparison of barefoot and two shod conditions in experienced barefoot runners. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 2009; 49: 6-13
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Tam N, Astephen Wilson JL, Coetzee DR, van Pletsen L, Tucker R. Loading rate increases during barefoot running in habitually shod runners: Individual responses to an unfamiliar condition. Gait Posture 2016; 46: 47-52
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Tam N, Astephen Wilson JL, Noakes TD, Tucker R. Barefoot running: An evaluation of current hypothesis, future research and clinical applications. Br J Sports Med 2014; 48: 349-355
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Tam N, Santos-Concejero J, Coetzee DR, Noakes TD, Tucker R. Muscle co-activation and its influence on running performance and risk of injury in elite Kenyan runners. J Sports Sci 2017; 35: 175-181
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Tam N, Tucker R, Astephen Wilson JL. Individual responses to a barefoot running program: Insight into risk of injury. Am J Sports Med 2016; 44: 777-784
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Tam N, Tucker R, Astephen Wilson JL, Santos-Concejero J. Effect on oxygen cost of transport from 8-weeks of progressive training with barefoot running. Int J Sports Med 2015; 47: 1009-1016
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Taunton JE, Ryan MB, Clement DB, McKenzie CD, Lloyd-Smith DR, Zumbo BD. A retrospective case-control analysis of 2002 running injuries. Br J Sports Med 2002 36: 95-101
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Warne JP, Warrington GD. Four-week habituation to simulated barefoot running improves running economy when compared with shod running. Scand J Med Sci Sports 2014; 24: 563-568
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Willson JD, Bjorhus JS, Williams DSB, Butler RJ, Porcari JP, Kernozek TW. Short-term changes in running mechanics and foot strike pattern after introduction to minimalistic footwear. PM R 2014; 6: 34-43 quiz 43
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Winter DA. Overall principle of lower limb support during stance phase of gait. J Biomech 1980; 13: 923-927
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar