Smaller and larger breasted women demonstrate differences in anthropometry, with body mass and BMI demonstrating strong relationships to breast mass. Measures of BMI and suprasternal notch to nipple distance enable predictions of breast mass and suggest that weight-related parameters are not appropriate exclusion criteria for mammaplasty.

To assess the effectiveness of breast support previous studies monitored breast kinematics and kinetics, subjective feedback, muscle activity (EMG), ground reaction forces (GRFs) and physiological measures in isolation. Comparing these variables within one study will establish the key performance variables that distinguish between breast supports during activities such as running. This study investigates the effects of changes in breast support on biomechanical, physiological and subjective measures during running. Ten females (34D) ran for 10 min in high and low breast supports, and for 2 min bare breasted (2.8 m·s). Breast and body kinematics, EMG, expired air and heart rate were recorded. GRFs were recorded during 10 m overground runs (2.8 m·s) and subjective feedback obtained after each condition. Of the 62 variables measured, 22 kinematic and subjective variables were influenced by changes in breast support. Willingness to exercise, time lag and superio-inferior breast velocity were most affected. GRFs, EMG and physiological variables were unaffected by breast support changes during running. Breast displacement reduction, although previously advocated, was not the most sensitive variable to breast support changes during running. Instead breast support products should be assessed using a battery of performance indicators, including the key kinematic and subjective variables identified here.

Multiplanar breast movement reduction is crucial to increasing physical activity participation amongst women. To date, research has focused on breast movement during running, but until breast movement is understood during different exercise modalities, the breast support requirements for specific activities are unknown. To understand breast support requirements during different exercise modalities, this study aimed to determine multiplanar breast kinematics during running, jumping and agility tasks. Sixteen 32D participants had markers attached to their right nipple and torso. Relative multiplanar breast displacement was calculated during bare-breasted treadmill running (10 kph), maximum countermovement jumping and an agility t-test. Exercise modality influenced the magnitude and direction of breast displacement, velocity and acceleration (p < .05). Jumping produced greater vertical breast displacement (.09 m) but less mediolateral breast displacement (.05 m) than running or the agility task, but agility tasks produced the highest multiplanar breast velocities and acceleration. Breast movement during jumping was predominantly in the vertical direction, whereas the agility task produced a greater percentage of mediolateral breast acceleration than running or jumping. Exercise modality impacted upon the magnitude and distribution of bare-breasted multiplanar breast kinematics in this homogenous 32D cohort. Therefore, to reduce breast movement in women of a 32D bra size, manufacturers may wish to design sport-specific products, with greater vertical support for exercise modalities incorporating jumping and greater mediolateral support for agility tasks.

Bare-breasted kinematics significantly increased with cup size during running. Differences in breast displacement, velocity, and acceleration between cup sizes could be predicted using estimates of breast mass based on conventional brassiere sizing. These data inform the design and evaluation of effective bra support.

Many women wear sports bras due to positive benefits associated with these garments (i.e. reduction in breast movement and breast pain), however the effects these garments have on upper body running kinematics has not been investigated. Ten female participants (32 DD or 34 D) completed two five kilometer treadmill runs (9 km h(-1)), once in a low and once in a high breast support. The range of motion (ROM) and peak torso, pelvis, and upper arm Cardan joint angles were calculated over five gait cycles during a five kilometer run. Peak torso yaw, peak rotation of the pelvis, peak pelvis obliquity, ROM in rotation of the pelvis, and ROM in upper arm extension were significant, but marginally reduced when participants ran in the high breast support. The running kinematics reported in the high breast support condition more closely align with economical running kinematics previously defined in the literature, therefore, running in a high breast support may be more beneficial to female runners, with a high breast support advocated for middle distance runners.