A new footwear technology to promote non-heelstrike landing and enhance running performance: Fact or fad?
- PMID: 27607302
- DOI: 10.1080/02640414.2016.1224915
A new footwear technology to promote non-heelstrike landing and enhance running performance: Fact or fad?
Abstract
This study sought to compare the kinetics and kinematics data in a group of habitual shod runners when running in traditional running shoes and newly designed minimalist shoes with lug platform. This novel footwear design claims to simulate barefoot running and reduce energy loss during impact. We compared footstrike angle (FSA), vertical average (VALR) and instantaneous (VILR) loading rates, energy loss and initial vertical stiffness between two shoe conditions. Runners demonstrated a decreased FSA while running in minimalist shoes with lug platform than traditional shoes (P = 0.003; Cohen's d = 0.918). However, we did not observe a landing pattern transition. VALR and VILR between two footwear conditions showed no significant difference (P = 0.191-0.258; Cohen's d = 0.304-0.460). Initial vertical stiffness (P = 0.032; Cohen's d = 0.671) and energy loss (P = 0.044; Cohen's d = 0.578) were greater when running in minimalist shoes with lug platform. The results show that minimalist shoes with lug platform reduce the FSA but may not lead to a landing pattern switch or lower vertical loading rates. Interestingly, the new shoe design leads to a greater energy loss than traditional running shoes, which could be explained by a higher initial vertical stiffness.
Keywords: Minimalist shoes; energy loss; footstrike pattern transition; hysteresis.
Similar articles
-
Landing pattern and vertical loading rates during first attempt of barefoot running in habitual shod runners.Hum Mov Sci. 2014 Apr;34:120-7. doi: 10.1016/j.humov.2014.01.006. Epub 2014 Feb 17. Hum Mov Sci. 2014. PMID: 24556474
-
Effect of minimalist and maximalist shoes on impact loading and footstrike pattern in habitual rearfoot strike trail runners: An in-field study.Eur J Sport Sci. 2021 Feb;21(2):183-191. doi: 10.1080/17461391.2020.1738559. Epub 2020 Mar 18. Eur J Sport Sci. 2021. PMID: 32126931
-
Kinematic and kinetic comparison of running in standard and minimalist shoes.Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2014 Feb;46(2):318-23. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e3182a595d2. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2014. PMID: 23877378
-
The effect of footwear on running performance and running economy in distance runners.Sports Med. 2015 Mar;45(3):411-22. doi: 10.1007/s40279-014-0283-6. Sports Med. 2015. PMID: 25404508 Review.
-
Injuries And Footwear (Part 2): Minimalist Running Shoes.J Spec Oper Med. 2016 Spring;16(1):89-96. J Spec Oper Med. 2016. PMID: 27045504 Review.
Cited by
-
A Re-examination of the Measurement of Foot Strike Mechanics During Running: The Immediate Effect of Footwear Midsole Thickness.Front Sports Act Living. 2022 Apr 26;4:824183. doi: 10.3389/fspor.2022.824183. eCollection 2022. Front Sports Act Living. 2022. PMID: 35557980 Free PMC article.
-
Factors Influencing Runner's Choices of Footwear.Front Sports Act Living. 2022 Mar 31;4:829514. doi: 10.3389/fspor.2022.829514. eCollection 2022. Front Sports Act Living. 2022. PMID: 35434615 Free PMC article.
-
Foot and Lower Limb Clinical and Structural Changes in Overuse Injured Recreational Runners Using Floating Heel Shoes: Preliminary Results of a Randomised Control Trial.Sensors (Basel). 2021 Nov 24;21(23):7814. doi: 10.3390/s21237814. Sensors (Basel). 2021. PMID: 34883818 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources