Running surface and heel injury

NewsBot · May 7, 2015

Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.
The Association between plantar heel pain and running surfaces in competitive long-distance male runners
Hotta T. , Nishiguchi S., Fukutani N., Tashiro Y., Adachi D., Morino S. 1, Aoyama T.
The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2015 May 05

AIM: Plantar heel pain (PHP) is a common complaint, and is most often caused by plantar fasciitis. Plantar fasciitis is reported to be associated with running surfaces, however the association between PHP and running surfaces has not previously been revealed in an epidemiological investigation. Therefore, the purpose of the current study was to examine the association between PHP and running surfaces.
METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study. A total of 347 competitive long-distance male runners participated in this study. The participants completed an original questionnaire, which included items assessing demographic characteristics, training characteristics focusing on running surfaces (soft surface, hard surface and tartan), and the prevalence of PHP during the previous 12 months. A logistic regression analysis was used to identify the effect of running surfaces on PHP.
RESULTS: We found that 21.9% of participants had experienced PHP during the previous 12 months. The multivariate logistic regression analysis, after adjusting for demographic and training characteristics, revealed that running on tartan was associated with PHP (odds ratio = 2.82, 95% confidence interval = 1.42 to 5.61; p <0.01).
CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that running more than 25% on tartan is associated with PHP in competitive long-distance male runners.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · Sep 5, 2015

Surface effects on in-shoe plantar pressure and tibial impact during running
Weijie Fu et al
Journal of Sport and Health Science; 2 September 2015

Purpose
This study aims to explore the effects of running on different surfaces on the characteristics of in-shoe plantar pressure and tibial acceleration.

Methods
Thirteen male recreational runners were required to run at 12 km/h velocity on concrete, synthetic track, natural grass, a normal treadmill, and a treadmill equipped with an ethylene vinyl acetate (EVA) cushioning underlay (treadmill_EVA). An in-shoe plantar pressure system and an accelerometer attached to the tibial tuberosity were used to record and analyze the characteristics of plantar pressure and tibial impact during running.

Results
The results showed that there were no significant differences in 1st and 2nd peak plantar pressure (time of occurrence), pressure-time integral, and peak pressure distribution for the concrete, synthetic, grass, and normal treadmill surfaces. No significant differences in peak positive acceleration were observed among the five tested surface conditions. Compared to the concrete surface, however, running on treadmill_EVA showed a significant decrease in 1st peak plantar pressure and the pressure-time integral for the impact phase (p < 0.05). These can be further ascribed to a reduced peak pressure observed at heel region (p < 0.05).

Conclusion
There may not be an inevitable relationship between the surface and the lower-limb impact in runners. It is, however, still noteworthy that the effects of different treadmill surfaces should be considered in the interpretation of plantar pressure performance and translation of such results to overground running.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · May 31, 2020

Biomechanical Analysis of Long Distance Running on Different Sports Surfaces
Source

Running is one of the most accessible physical activities and long-distance running has attracted extensive attention in the past several years. While the incidence of running injuries, especially to the lower extremities, has increased. The objective of this study was to investigate the differences in ground reaction forces (GRF) and kinematic param between long-distance runners before and after long-distance running on treadmill (TM), asphalt road (AR), and plastic track (PT). Eight-camera Vicon motion analysis system was used to measure the hip, knee and ankle motion param of 10 healthy male subjects at a speed of 2.8 ± 0.2m/s. The hip, knee and ankle kinematics and the relationship of joint angles of lower limbs in the sagittal plane, coronal plane and transversal plane were analyzed. Ground reaction force (GRF) was collected using an AMTI force platform. The results showed that there were no significant differences in GRF and average loading rate (VALR). There was no significant difference in the range of motion (ROM) of ankle and hip after long-distance running on three surfaces compared to pre-test. Compared with stance-period of pre-test, the stance-period of AR and PT were significantly longer. Post hoc analyses exhibited the stance-period of AR and PT were longer than TM. In conclusion, runners can adjust different joints angles to maintain a similar GRF during long-distance running on different sports surfaces.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · Feb 22, 2021

Effects of Running Surface Stiffness on Three-Segment Foot Kinematics Responses with Different Shod Conditions
Noor Arifah Azwani Abdul Yamin et al
Appl Bionics Biomech. 2021 Jan 30;2021

Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of surface stiffness on multisegment foot kinematics and temporal parameters during running.

Methods: Eighteen male subjects ran on three different surfaces (i.e., concrete, artificial grass, and rubber) in both heeled running shoes (HS) and minimal running shoes (MS). Both these shoes had dissimilar sole profiles. The heeled shoes had a higher sole at the heel, a thick base, and arch support, whereas the minimal shoes had a flat base sole. Indeed, the studied biomechanical parameters responded differently in the different footwear during running. Subjects ran in recreational mode speed while 3D foot kinematics (i.e., joint rotation and peak medial longitudinal arch (MLA) angle) were determined using a motion capture system (Qualysis, Gothenburg, Sweden). Information on stance time and plantar fascia strain (PFS) was also collected.

Results: Running on different surface stiffness was found to significantly affect the peak MLA angles and stance times for both HS and MS conditions. However, the results showed that the joint rotation angles were not sensitive to surface stiffness. Also, PFS showed no relationship with surface stiffness, as the results were varied as the surface stiffness was changed.

Conclusion: The surface stiffness significantly contributed towards the effects of peak MLA angle and stance time. These findings may enhance the understanding of biomechanical responses on various running surfaces stiffness in different shoe conditions.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · Aug 4, 2022

Effects of overground surfaces on running kinematics and kinetics in habitual non-rearfoot strikers
Wenxing Zhou,Zhangqi Lai,Shiwei Mo &Lin Wang
Journal of Sports Sciences; Volume 39, 2021 - Issue 16

This study aimed to investigate the effects of different overground surfaces on running biomechanics of non-rearfoot strikers. Thirty-one male habitual non-rearfoot strikers were required to run at 3.3 ± 0.2 m/s on a customized runway with artificial grass, concrete, or synthetic rubber surfaces in a random order. Vertical loading rates, three-dimensional ground reaction forces (GRFs), and lower-limb joint angles and moments were compared among surfaces. Regarding kinematics, significances were only detected in maximum knee flexion angle, with greater values when running on artificial grass compared to synthetic rubber or concrete. Regarding kinetics, changes were demonstrated in GRF peaks and lower-limb joint moments. GRF peaks were significantly greater when running on synthetic rubber or artificial grass compared to concrete; lower-limb joint moments were significantly lower when running on synthetic rubber compared to concrete; these changes were inconsistent when running on artificial grass compared to concrete. Significant differences were demonstrated in running kinetics when habitual non-rearfoot strikers ran on different overground surfaces. Running on artificial grass or synthetic rubber caused greater GRFs than running on concrete. However, only synthetic rubber could reduce joint loads.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · Apr 3, 2023

Surface effects on kinematics, kinetics and stiffness of habitual rearfoot strikers during running
Wenxing Zhou,Lulu Yin,Jiayi Jiang,Yu Zhang,Cheng-pang Hsiao,Yiyang Chen,Shiwei Mo ,Lin Wang
March 22, 2023

The surface effects on running biomechanics have been greatly investigated. However, the effects on rearfoot strike runners remain unknown. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of surfaces on the running kinematics, kinetics, and lower-limb stiffness of habitual rearfoot strikers. Thirty healthy male runners were recruited to run at 3.3 ± 0.2 m/s on a customized runway covered with three different surfaces (artificial grass, synthetic rubber, or concrete), and their running kinematics, kinetics, and lower-limb stiffness were compared. Differences among the three surfaces were examined using statistical parametric mapping and one-way repeated-measure analysis of variance. There were no statistical differences in the lower-limb joint motion, vertical ground reaction force (GRF), loading rates, and lower-limb stiffness when running on the three surfaces. The braking force (17%–36% of the stance phase) and mediolateral GRF were decreased when running on concrete surface compared with running on the other two surfaces. The moments of ankle joint in all three plane movement and frontal plane hip and knee joints were increased when running on concrete surface. Therefore, habitual rearfoot strikers may expose to a higher risk of running-related overuse injuries when running on a harder surface.
Click to expand...

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

Footfall patterns during barefoot running on harder and softer surfaces

Running surface article

The natural frequency of the foot-surface cushion during the stance phase of running

Compression fatigue of midsoles of running shoes

The Running Injury Continuum tool

Running mechanics & interventions

Treating running injuries in adolescents

Share This Page