Download PDF
Int J Sports Med 2018; 39(14): 1075-1080
DOI: 10.1055/a-0667-9875
Orthopedics & Biomechanics
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Impact Loading During Distracted Running Before and After Auditory Gait Retraining

Eric Ching
1   Gait & Motion Analysis Laboratory, Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong"
,
Winko Wen-Kang An
1   Gait & Motion Analysis Laboratory, Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong"
,
Ivan Pui Hung Au
1   Gait & Motion Analysis Laboratory, Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong"
,
Janet Hanwen Zhang
1   Gait & Motion Analysis Laboratory, Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong"
,
Zoe Y.S. Chan
1   Gait & Motion Analysis Laboratory, Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong"
,
Gary Shum
2   Faculty of Sport, Health and Wellbeing, Plymouth Marjon University, Plymouth, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
,
Roy T.H. Cheung
1   Gait & Motion Analysis Laboratory, Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong"
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History



accepted 26 July 2018

Publication Date:
12 November 2018 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Visual feedback gait retraining has been reported to successfully reduce impact loading in runners, even when the runners were distracted. However, auditory feedback is more feasible in real life application. Hence, this study compared the peak positive acceleration (PPA), vertical average (VALR) and instantaneous (VILR) loading rate during distracted running before and after a course of auditory feedback gait retraining in 16 runners. The runners were asked to land with softer footfalls with and without auditory feedback. Low or high sound pitch was generated according to the impact of particular footfall, when compared with the preset target. Runners then received a course of auditory gait retraining, and after the gait retraining, runners completed a reassessment. Runners before gait retraining exhibited lower PPA, VALR and VILR with augmented auditory feedback (p<0.049). We found a reduction in PPA, VALR and VILR after gait retraining, regardless of the presence of feedback (p<0.018). However, runners after gait retraining did not demonstrate further reduction in PPA and VALR with auditory feedback (p>0.104). A small effect of auditory feedback on VILR in runners after gait retraining was observed (p=0.032). Real time auditory feedback gait retraining is effective in impact loading reduction, even when the runners were distracted.

Key words

wearable sensor - accelerometer - vertical loading rate - dual task - kinetics
 

  • References

  • 1 Agresta C, Brown A. Gait Retraining for injured and healthy runners using augmented feedback: A systematic literature review. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2015; 45: 576-584
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 An W, Rainbow MJ, Cheung RTH. Effects of Surface inclination on the vertical loading rates and landing pattern during the first attempt of barefoot running in habitual shod runners. BioMed Res Int 2015; 2015: 240153
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Barrios JA, Crossley KM, Davis IS. Gait retraining to reduce the knee adduction moment through real-time visual feedback of dynamic knee alignment. J Biomech 2010; 43: 2208-2213
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Blackmore T, Willy RW, Creaby MW. The high frequency component of the vertical ground reaction force is a valid surrogate measure of the impact peak. J Biomech 2016; 49: 479-483
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Caldwell LK, Laubach LL, Barrios JA. Effect of specific gait modifications on medial knee loading, metabolic cost and perception of task difficulty. Clin Biomech 2013; 28: 649-654
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Chan ZYS, Zhang JH, Au IPH, An WW, Shum GLK, Ng GYF, Cheung RTH. Gait retraining for the reduction of injury occurrence in novice distance runners: 1-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial. Am J Sports Med 2018; 46: 388-395
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Cheung RTH, An WW, Au IPH, Zhang JH, Chan ZYS, MacPhail AJ. Control of impact loading during distracted running before and after gait retraining in runners. J Sports Sci 2018; 36: 1497-1501
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Clansey AC, Hanlon M, Wallace ES, Nevill A, Lake MJ. Influence of tibial shock feedback training on impact loading and running economy. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2014; 46: 973-981
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Crowell HP, Davis IS. Gait retraining to reduce lower extremity loading in runners. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2011; 26: 78-83
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Crowell HP, Milner CE, Hamill J, Davis IS. Reducing Impact Loading During Running With the Use of Real-Time Visual Feedback. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2010; 40: 206-213
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Davis IS, Futrell E. Gait retraining: Altering the fingerprints of gait. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am 2016; 27: 339-355
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Dubost V, Annweiler C, Aminian K, Najafi B, Herrmann FR, Beauchet O. Stride-to-stride variability while enumerating animal names among healthy young adults: Result of stride velocity or effect of attention-demanding task?. Gait Posture 2008; 27: 138-143
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Eriksson M, Halvorsen KA, Gullstrand L. Immediate effect of visual and auditory feedback to control the running mechanics of well-trained athletes. J Sports Sci 2011; 29: 253-262
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Fendrich R, Corballis PM. The temporal cross-capture of audition and vision. Percept Psychophys 2001; 63: 719-725
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Fitts PM, Posner MI. Human Performance. Oxford, England: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company; 1967
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Goldstone S, Boardman WK, Lhamon WT. Intersensory comparisons of temporal judgments. J Exp Psychol 1959; 57: 243-248
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Goodfellow LD. An Empirical Comparison of Audition, Vision, and Touch in the Discrimination of Short Intervals of Time. Am J Psychol 1934; 46: 243-258
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Grondin S. Duration discrimination of empty and filled intervals marked by auditory and visual signals. Percept Psychophys 1993; 54: 383-394
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Grondin S, Meilleur-Wells G, Ouellette C, Macar F. Sensory effects on judgments of short time-intervals. Psychol Res 1998; 61: 261-268
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Grondin S, Ouellet B. Roussel M-Ève. About optimal timing and stability of Weber fraction for duration discrimination.. Acoust Sci Tech 2001; 22: 370-372
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Hafer JF, Brown AM, deMille P, Hillstrom HJ, Garber CE. The effect of a cadence retraining protocol on running biomechanics and efficiency: A pilot study. J Sports Sci 2015; 33: 724-731
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Harriss D, Macsween A, Atkinson G. Standards for ethics in sport and exercise science research: 2018 update. Int J Sports Med 2017; 38: 1126-1131
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Morein-Zamir S, Soto-Faraco S, Kingstone A. Auditory capture of vision: Examining temporal ventriloquism. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res 2003; 17: 154-163
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Napier C, Esculier J-F, Hunt MA. Gait retraining: Out of the lab and onto the streets with the benefit of wearables. Br J Sports Med 2017; 51: 1642-1643
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Noehren B, Scholz J, Davis I. The effect of real-time gait retraining on hip kinematics, pain and function in subjects with patellofemoral pain syndrome. Br J Sports Med 2011; 45: 691-696
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Recanzone GH. Auditory influences on visual temporal rate perception. J Neurophysiol 2003; 89: 1078-1093
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Richards R, van der Esch M, van den Noort JC, Harlaar J. The learning process of gait retraining using real-time feedback in patients with medial knee osteoarthritis. Gait Posture 2018; 62: 1-6
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Riley PO, Dicharry J, Franz J, Croce UD, Wilder RP, Kerrigan DC. A Kinematics and Kinetic Comparison of Overground and Treadmill Running: Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2008; 40: 1093-1100
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Schmidt R, Lee T. Motor Learning And Performance: From Principles to Application. 5th Edition IL, USA: Human Kinetics; 2014
    Google Scholar
  • 30 Sullivan GM, Feinn R. Using effect size – or why the p-value is not enough. J Grad Med Educ 2012; 4: 279-282
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Tate JJ, Milner CE. Sound intensity feedback during running reduces loading rates and impact peak. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2017; 7: 1-18
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Willy RW, Buchenic L, Rogacki K, Ackerman J, Schmidt A, Willson JD. In-field gait retraining and mobile monitoring to address running biomechanics associated with tibial stress fracture. Scand J Med Sci Sports 2016; 26: 197-205
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Willy RW, Scholz JP, Davis IS. Mirror gait retraining for the treatment of patellofemoral pain in female runners. Clin Biomech 2012; 27: 1045-1051
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Wood CM, Kipp K. Use of audio biofeedback to reduce tibial impact accelerations during running. J Biomech 2014; 47: 1739-1741
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 van der Worp H, Vrielink JW, Bredeweg SW. Do runners who suffer injuries have higher vertical ground reaction forces than those who remain injury-free? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med 2016; 50: 450-457
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar