No abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate the interaction of foot strike and common speeds on sagittal plane ankle and knee joint kinetics in competitive rear foot strike (RFS) runners when running with a RFS pattern and an imposed forefoot strike (FFS) pattern. Sixteen competitive habitual male RFS runners ran at two different speeds (i.e. 8 and 6 min mile(-1)) using their habitual RFS and an imposed FFS pattern. A repeated measures analysis of variance was used to assess a potential interaction between strike pattern and speed for selected ground reaction force (GRF) variables and, sagittal plane ankle and knee kinematic and kinetic variables. No foot strike and speed interaction was observed for any of the kinetic variables. Habitual RFS yielded a greater loading rate of the vertical GRF, peak ankle dorsiflexor moment, peak knee extensor moment, peak knee eccentric extensor power, peak dorsiflexion and sagittal plane knee range of motion compared to imposed FFS. Imposed FFS yielded greater maximum vertical GRF, peak ankle plantarflexor moment, peak ankle eccentric plantarflexor power and sagittal plane ankle ROM compared to habitual RFS. Consistent with previous literature, imposed FFS in habitual RFS reduces eccentric knee extensor and ankle dorsiflexor involvement but produce greater eccentric ankle plantarflexor action compared to RFS. These acute differences between strike patterns were independent of running speeds equivalent to typical easy and hard training runs in competitive male runners. Current findings along with previous literature suggest differences in lower extremity kinetics between habitual RFS and imposed FFS running are consistent among a variety of runner populations.

Research has focused on the effects of acute strike pattern modifications on lower extremity joint stiffness and running economy (RE). Strike pattern modifications on running biomechanics have mostly been studied while runners complete short running bouts. This study examined the effects of an imposed forefoot strike (FFS) on RE and ankle and knee joint stiffness before and after a long run in habitual rearfoot strike (RFS) runners. Joint kinetics and RE were collected before and after a long run. Sagittal joint kinetics were computed from kinematic and ground reaction force data that were collected during over-ground running trials in 13 male runners. RE was measured during treadmill running. Knee flexion range of motion, knee extensor moment and ankle joint stiffness were lower while plantarflexor moment and knee joint stiffness were greater during imposed FFS compared with RFS. The long run did not influence the difference in ankle and knee joint stiffness between strike patterns. Runners were more economical during RFS than imposed FFS and RE was not influenced by the long run. These findings suggest that using a FFS pattern towards the end of a long run may not be mechanically or metabolically beneficial for well-trained male RFS runners.

The purposes of this study were to compare selected biomechanical variables before and after a long run, and to assess the relationship between weekly running volume and changes in lower limb biomechanics after the run. Twelve trained habitual rearfoot strike male runners ran overground before and after a treadmill long run while kinematic and kinetic data were recorded. Repeated measures analysis of variance and Cohen's d effect sizes were used to compare kinematic and kinetic variables before and after the run. Loading rate was 6% higher after the run (p < .05) but this difference had a small effect size (d = .32). Moderate effects were found for a 25% increase in peak ankle eversion (d = 0.62) and a 10% increase in hip adduction (d = 0.60) after the run. These findings suggest that the completion of a submaximal long run does not yield potentially injurious lower limb biomechanics in uninjured rearfoot strike runners. Weekly running mileage was not correlated to biomechanical changes observed before and after the long run. Since biomechanical responses to the long run varied among runners, differences in other factors such as specific training regimens and neuromuscular control should be considered in future studies.