Barefoot running – some critical considerations

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to discuss critically selected aspects of the current discussion on barefoot running, specifically differences between barefoot and shod running in kinematics and kinetics, training effects, performance and economy and injury frequency.The kinematics and kinetics depend on many different factors, including surface, shoe, running speed and subject. In general, hard surfaces are associated with a flatter foot landing. However, the inter-individual differences are substantial and it is not appropriate to associate barefoot running with toe landing and shod running with heel landing.The training effects for the small muscles crossing the ankle joint are small during running and substantially higher for movements such as side shuffling, independent of footwear.The additional mass added to the foot by the shoe seems not to have a negative effect on performance until at a 'threshold mass' of about 200 to 250 g. The additional work due to the damping of vibrations of soft tissue compartments seems not to depend primarily on the footwear but rather on the individual comfort of the runner.To the knowledge of the authors, there is no conclusive evidence that barefoot running has more, equal or less injuries than shod running. From a biomechanical point of view, injuries are a result of overloading of a given structure. The internal active forces in the lower extremities are about 500% higher than the internal impact forces. Consequently, these impact forces may not be the major reason for potential running injuries.

Eight weeks gait retraining in minimalist footwear has no effect on running economy

“…gait retraining had no effect on RE (Ardigo et al, 1995;Fletcher et al, 2008;Gruber et al, 2013;Messier & Cirillo, 1989), or may even make RE worse (Cavanagh & Williams, 1982;Dallam et al, 2005;Tseh, Caputo, & Morgan, 2008). To support these studies, Nigg and Enders (2013) and Saunders et al (2004) have suggested that self-selected running kinematics rather than deliberate changes are more appropriate for optimizing RE. This may be because deliberate changes result in deviations from the preferred movement pathway that has been dictated by physiological and neuromuscular adaptations to repeated training (Saunders et al, 2004) that will not be optimized immediately (Bonacci, Chapman, Blanch, & Vicenzino, 2009).…”

Dynamic in-vivo assessment of navicular drop while running in barefoot, minimalist, and motion control footwear conditions

“…Unfortunately, the etiology of running-related injuries is not well understood. Previous research has reported that increasing age, female gender, previous injury, high BMI, low fitness level, foot posture, and excessive training distance are associated with injury [1][2][3]. Previous research has also suggested that pronation or pronation rate may be associated with injury [4,5], and this belief has led to the development of running shoes aimed at reducing pronation (e.g., motion control shoes).…”

“…Running-related injuries such as medial tibial stress syndrome (''shin splints''), patellofemoral pain syndrome (''runner's knee''), Achilles tendonitis, plantar fasciitis, and iliotibial band syndrome have been reported to affect approximately 20-79% of runners on an annual basis [1,2]. Unfortunately, the etiology of running-related injuries is not well understood.…”

The pursuit of improved running performance: Can changes in cushioning and proprioception influence running economy and injury risk?

“…Whilst BFT gait adjustments have been reported to reduce injury likelihood (Lieberman et al 2010, Robbins & Hanna 1987, there is no conclusive evidence to support this notion (Nigg & Enders 2013). In fact, there is some evidence of an increase in peak tibial acceleration when running BFT compared with SH (McNair & Marshall 1994, Sinclair et al 2013a.…”

“…A recent review concluded that currently there is no consensus in the literature regarding the affect that BFT and/or MS running has on running economy (RE) (Nigg & Enders 2013), a crucial factor in determining performance in long distance running events (Conley & Krahenbuhl 1980). The differing methodologies are perhaps, in part, the reason for contrasting evidence.…”