Acute effect of a long-distance road competition on foot strike patterns, inversion and kinematics parameters in endurance runners

Journal of Human Kinetics

Jerez‐Mayorga

Román

et al. 2020

Self Cite

This study aimed to analyse the effects of running velocity on spatiotemporal parameters and step variability in amateur endurance runners, according to sex. A group of 51 males and 46 females performed an incremental running test on a treadmill (10-16 km/h). Spatiotemporal parameters (contact and flight time, step length, step frequency and step angle [CT, FT, SL, SF, SA]) and step variability, in terms of within-participant standard deviation (SD), were recorded through the OptoGait System. The ANOVA showed significant differences in the magnitude of the spatiotemporal parameters as running velocity increased (p < 0.001). It also revealed significant differences in step variability (p < 0.005) over the entire running protocol. Between-sex differences in CT, SL, SL-normalized and SF (p < 0.05, ES = 0.4-0.8) were found. Differences were also found in step variability at high velocities (15-16 km/h), with males showing a greater SD than females. In conclusion, increasing running velocity makes CT shorter, FT and SL longer, and SF and SA greater in amateur endurance runners, changing step variability, regardless of sex. Additionally, some between-sex differences were found in spatiotemporal parameters and step variability.

Section: Tablementioning

confidence: 50%

How do Amateur Endurance Runners Alter Spatiotemporal Parameters and Step Variability as Running Velocity Increases? A Sex Comparison

Journal of Human Kinetics

Jerez‐Mayorga

Román

et al. 2020

Self Cite

“…First, a previous work showed that increases in plantar-flexion angles during ground contact caused significant changes in the springmass characteristics describing human motion, with higher stiffness values (Horvais and Samozino, 2013). Unfortunately, this parameter was not controlled in the current study, but a previous work (Latorre-Román et al, 2015) concluded that rearfoot striking was more frequent in lower level endurance runners. Anyway, more evidence is needed to highlight the role of the foot strike pattern in lower-body stiffness during running.…”

Section: A Comparison Between Er and Nrmentioning

confidence: 80%

How Do Spatiotemporal Parameters and Lower-Body Stiffness Change with Increased Running Velocity? A Comparison Between Novice and Elite Level Runners

Journal of Human Kinetics

García-Ramos

Ramírez‐Campillo

et al. 2019

Self Cite

This study aimed to examine the effect of running velocity on spatiotemporal parameters and lower-body stiffness of endurance runners, and the influence of the performance level on those adaptations. Twenty-two male runners (novice [NR], n = 12, and elite runners [ER], n = 10) performed an incremental running test with a total of 5 different running velocities (10, 12, 14, 16, 18 km/h). Each condition lasted 1 min (30 s acclimatization period, and 30 s recording period). Spatiotemporal parameters were measured using the OptoGait system. Vertical (Kvert) and leg (Kleg) stiffness were calculated according to the sine-wave method. A repeated measures ANOVA (2 x 5, group x velocities) revealed significant adaptations (p < 0.05) to increased velocity in all spatiotemporal parameters and Kvert in both NR and ER. ER showed a greater flight time (FT) and step angle (at 18 km/h) (p < 0.05), longer step length (SL) and lower step frequency (SF) (p < 0.05), whereas no between-group differences were found in contact time (CT) nor in the sub-phases during CT at any speed (p ≥ 0.05). ER also showed lower Kvert values at every running velocity (p < 0.05), and no differences in Kleg (p ≥ 0.05). In conclusion, lower SF and Kvert and, thereby, longer FT and SL, seem to be the main spatiotemporal characteristics of high-level runners compared to their low-level counterparts.

“…The effect of exertion on running kinematics has been extensively studied 45, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59. However, most of these studies were performed under laboratory conditions and with athletes performing prolonged treadmill runs53, 54, 60 or running-induced fatigue protocol on treadmills 55, 56, 61.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In turn, after CR protocols, some studies found fatigue-induced changes during running at kinematic level, for example, increased trunk inclination peak angle, 59 decreased knee flexion angle at foot strike, 54 increased step length with a corresponding decrease in cadence, 53 and changes in foot strike pattern 57, 58. Thus, based on the biomechanical response to CR and HIIT protocols, and being especially cautious because of the wide variety of running protocols used, the authors suggest that CR causes greater impairments to running kinematics than HIIT protocols, including runs for 1–2 min and performed at intensity close to VO 2max .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How does high-intensity intermittent training affect recreational endurance runners? Acute and chronic adaptations: A systematic review

Journal of Sport and Health Science

Soto-Hermoso

Román

2017

Self Cite

ObjectiveThis systematic review aimed to critically analyze the literature to determine how high-intensity intermittent training (HIIT) affects recreational endurance runners in the short- and long-term.MethodsElectronic databases were searched for literature dating from January 2000 to October 2015. The search was conducted using the key words “high-intensity intermittent training” or “high-intensity interval exercise” or “interval running” or “sprint interval training” and “endurance runners” or “long distance runners”. A systematic approach was used to evaluate the 783 articles identified for initial review. Studies were included if they investigated HIIT in recreational endurance runners. The methodological quality of the studies was evaluated using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale (for intervention studies) and the modified Downs and Black Quality Index (for cross-sectional studies).ResultsTwenty-three studies met the inclusionary criteria for review. The results are presented in 2 parts: cross-sectional (n = 15) and intervention studies (n = 8). In the 15 cross-sectional studies selected, endurance runners performed at least 1 HIIT protocol, and the acute impact on physiological, neuromuscular, metabolic and/or biomechanical variables was assessed. Intervention studies lasted a minimum of 4 weeks, with 10 weeks being the longest intervention period, and included 2 to 4 HIIT sessions per week. Most of these studies combined HIIT sessions with continuous run (CR) sessions; 2 studies' subjects performed HIIT exclusively.ConclusionHIIT-based running plans (2 to 3 HIIT sessions per week, combining HIIT and CR runs) show athletic performance improvements in endurance runners by improving maximal oxygen uptake and running economy along with muscular and metabolic adaptations. To maximize the adaptations to training, both HIIT and CR must be part of training programs for endurance runners.