Background: Treadmills are routinely used to assess running performance and training parameters related to physiological or perceived effort. These measurements are presumed to replicate overground running but there has been no systematic review comparing performance, physiology and perceived effort between treadmill and overground running.
Objective: The objective of this systematic review was to compare physiological, perceptual and performance measures between treadmill and overground running in healthy adults.
Methods: AMED (Allied and Contemporary Medicine), CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health), EMBASE, MEDLINE, SCOPUS, SPORTDiscus and Web of Science databases were searched from inception until May 2018. Included studies used a crossover study design to compare physiological (oxygen uptake [[Formula: see text]O2], heart rate [HR], blood lactate concentration [La]), perceptual (rating of perceived exertion [RPE] and preferred speed) or running endurance and sprint performance (i.e. time trial duration or sprint speed) outcomes between treadmill (motorised or non-motorised) and overground running. Physiological outcomes were considered across submaximal, near-maximal and maximal running intensity subgroups. Meta-analyses were used to determine mean difference (MD) or standardised MD (SMD) ± 95% confidence intervals.
Results: Thirty-four studies were included. Twelve studies used a 1% grade for the treadmill condition and three used grades > 1%. Similar [Formula: see text]O2 but lower La occurred during submaximal motorised treadmill running at 0% ([Formula: see text]O2 MD: - 0.55 ± 0.93 mL/kg/min; La MD: - 1.26 ± 0.71 mmol/L) and 1% ([Formula: see text]O2 MD: 0.37 ± 1.12 mL/kg/min; La MD: - 0.52 ± 0.50 mmol/L) grade than during overground running. HR and RPE during motorised treadmill running were higher at faster submaximal speeds and lower at slower submaximal speeds than during overground running. [Formula: see text]O2 (MD: - 1.25 ± 2.09 mL/kg/min) and La (MD: - 0.54 ± 0.63 mmol/L) tended to be lower, but HR (MD: 0 ± 1 bpm), and RPE (MD: - 0.4 ± 2.0 units [6-20 scale]) were similar during near-maximal motorised treadmill running to during overground running. Maximal motorised treadmill running caused similar [Formula: see text]O2 (MD: 0.78 ± 1.55 mL/kg/min) and HR (MD: - 1 ± 2 bpm) to overground running. Endurance performance was poorer (SMD: - 0.50 ± 0.36) on a motorised treadmill than overground but sprint performance varied considerably and was not significantly different (MD: - 1.4 ± 5.8 km/h).
Conclusions: Some, but not all, variables differ between treadmill and overground running, and may be dependent on the running speed at which they are assessed.
Protocol registration: CRD42017074640 (PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews).
Is Motorized Treadmill Running Biomechanically Comparable to Overground Running? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cross-Over StudiesB Van Hooren et al. Sports Med. PMID 31802395. - ReviewSpatiotemporal, kinematic, kinetic, muscle activity, and muscle-tendon outcome measures are largely comparable between motorized treadmill and overground running. Conside …
Is There a Diurnal Variation in Repeated Sprint Ability on a Non-Motorised Treadmill?SA Pullinger et al. Chronobiol Int 31 (3), 421-32. PMID 24328815.In active males, muscle force production and short-term (<6 s) anaerobic performance are significantly greater in the evening compared with the morning. This diurnal v …
Treadmill Running Using an RPE-clamp Model: Mediators of Perception and Implications for Exercise PrescriptionKC Cochrane-Snyman et al. Eur J Appl Physiol 119 (9), 2083-2094. PMID 31372804.HR and [Formula: see text] may play a role in mediating the perception of effort, while [Formula: see text], RER, and [Formula: see text] may not. Although HR and [Formul …
Non-motorized Treadmill Running Is Associated With Higher Cardiometabolic Demands Compared With Overground and Motorized Treadmill RunningRB Edwards et al. Front Physiol 8, 914. PMID 29184508.The aim of this study was to compare the cardiometabolic demands of running on a curved non-motorized treadmill (cNMT) with overground (OVR) and motorized treadmill (MOT) …
Advances in Sprint Acceleration Profiling for Field-Based Team-Sport Athletes: Utility, Reliability, Validity and LimitationsKD Simperingham et al. Sports Med 46 (11), 1619-1645. PMID 26914267. - ReviewRadar, laser, NMT and TT technologies can be used to reliably measure sprint acceleration performance and to provide insight into the determinants of sprinting speed. How …
Cited by 2 PubMed Central articles
Landing-Takeoff Asymmetries Applied to Running Mechanics: A New Perspective for PerformanceRG da Rosa et al. Front Physiol 10, 415. PMID 31040793.The elastic bouncing was optimized in runners of the best performance level, demonstrating a better use of elastic components.
A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Crossover Studies Comparing Physiological, Perceptual and Performance Measures Between Treadmill and Overground RunningJR Miller et al. Sports Med 49 (5), 763-782. PMID 30847825. - ReviewSome, but not all, variables differ between treadmill and overground running, and may be dependent on the running speed at which they are assessed.