This study aimed to examine the views of runners regarding their experiences with congestion during running events, including its prevalence, its impact on their safety and satisfaction, and their preferred controls to mitigate congestion. Runners (n = 222) with varied experience participating in running events (1-5+ years, 5-km races to Ultramarathons, and a mixture of road, trail, and cross-country events) completed an electronic survey. The survey was developed to assess the characteristics of respondents, whether they have experienced congestion during running events, the impact of congestion they have experienced during running events on their safety and satisfaction, and their preferred controls for congestion during running events. Survey data indicated runners had experienced some form of congestion prior to the race in the start corrals (93% of respondents), as the race started (97% of respondents), and during the race while running (88% of respondents). In turn, 73% of respondents indicated their experiences with congestion somewhat to extremely (i.e., rating of at least 3 on a 5-point Likert scale) negatively impacted their satisfaction with an event, while 43% of respondents indicated congestion somewhat to extremely negatively impacted their safety during an event. Regarding the impact of congestion on runner safety, 38% of respondents indicated they had slipped, while 27% of respondents indicated they had fallen during running events due to congestion. Further, congestion was attributed to injuries sustained (9%) and not finishing a race due to sustaining an injury (5%) during running events in some respondents. Respondents identified seeding runners based on previous run times (91%), use of wave starts (91%), and designing courses with limited pinch points, U-turns, and narrow paths (89%) as their most preferred controls to mitigate congestion during running events. Respondents resoundingly indicated self-seeding is not an effective method of managing congestion during running events. This study provides novel evidence that congestion is an issue for runners during running events, subsequently diminishing their satisfaction with events and posing safety concerns. In this way, race directors should involve runners in their decision-making processes when implementing appropriate controls to combat congestion for minimising injury risk to runners and ensuring a viable participant base remains attracted to their events in the future.
This qualitative study aimed to examine the views of Australian race directors regarding the prevalence of congestion and its impact on runners during running events. Five race directors who organise large running events in Australia were interviewed in a focus group setting. Thirty-five Australian race directors also completed an electronic survey examining their experiences with congestion during running events they organise. Similar themes emerged from findings gathered in the focus group and survey. Race directors in Australia receive negative feedback from runners regarding congestion. Furthermore, race directors indicated congestion impacts runner safety resulting in incidents and injuries to runners during events. Congestion was also reported to reduce runner satisfaction with the event when runners are unable to run at predetermined paces. This study provides foundation evidence identifying congestion as an issue in running events, with congestion subsequently leading to negative consequences from the perspective of race directors.
This study examined the impact of congestion-related controls on runner density, flow rate, perceived safety, and satisfaction during an Australian running event. Runner congestion was compared between races organized at the Sunshine Coast Marathon and Running Festival in 2019 without controls and in 2021 with added controls, including modifications to the start corral design and use of wave starts. Following a mixed-method design, runner congestion was quantitatively measured via determining runner density and flow rate in the start corrals with video analyses, while post-event surveys were used to gather qualitative evidence regarding the prevalence of congestion and its impact on runner safety and satisfaction. Descriptive analyses for quantitative data showed runner density (1.48–3.01 vs. 0.52–1.20 runners per m2) and flow rate (102–152 vs. 36–59 runners per min per m) were reduced across races with controls. Regarding qualitative data, Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney rank-sum tests demonstrated a significantly (p < 0.01) lower prevalence of congestion was perceived on course while running, alongside a reduced (p = 0.08) perceived impact of congestion on event satisfaction across races with controls. Furthermore, descriptive analyses for qualitative data showed a reduced proportion of runners indicated the start corrals were “somewhat” to “extremely” (rating of at least 3 on a 5-point scale) congested upon race commencement with controls (64% vs. 75%), and perceived safety (10% vs. 17%) and satisfaction (17% vs. 30%) were “somewhat” to “extremely” impacted by congestion across races with controls. Adopting suitable start corral designs with wave starts may enable race directors to reduce runner congestion to enhance continued participation among the public and viability of their running events.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.