Biomechanical variables and perception of comfort in running shoes with different cushioning technologies

Dinato, Roberto C.; Ribeiro, Ana Paula; Butugan, Marco K.; Pereira, Ivye L. R.; Onodera, Andrea Naomi; Sacco, Isabel de Camargo Neves

doi:10.1016/j.jsams.2013.12.003

Cited by 59 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It was thought that the extra thickness of the shoes may create a sense of protection or safety, that may allow a runner to contact the ground with a relatively higher force without experiencing pain or discomfort (Dinato, et al, 2015). While our results on the LR were supported by a few studies (Chambon, et al.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 72%

“…The cushion materials for both shoes were inevitably different due to the different shoe manufacturers, and this could be another limitation of the study. While we could not control this difference, stiffness and other mechanical properties of the cushioning material can affect running biomechanics (Baltich, Maurer, & Nigg, 2015;Cheung & Ng, 2008;Dinato, et al, 2015;Dixon, 2008;B.M. Nigg, Bahlsen, Luethi, & Stokes, 1987;B.M.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

No immediate effects of highly cushioned shoes on basic running biomechanics

Aminaka

Arthur

Porcari

et al. 2018

Kinesiology (Zagreb, Online)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The aim of the study was to investigate the effects of highly cushioned shoes on running biomechanics. Sixteen recreational runners (8 males, 8 females) participated and ran at a self-selected pace across the force platform in the research laboratory wearing either the standard or highly cushioned shoes, in randomized order. Impact peak (IP), loading rate to IP (LR), active peak (AP), contact time (CT), strike index (SI), running velocity, and knee and ankle kinematics at initial contact (IC) and AP were recorded during the running trials. Overall, there was no effect of footwear on IP, LR, AP, CT and velocity (p>.05) with small effect sizes (ES<0.2). The highly cushioned shoes resulted in a more anterior foot strike pattern, based on the slightly higher SI (p=.03, ES=0.5), although the runners demonstrated a rearfoot strike pattern regardless of shoe condition. No kinematic differences were observed at IC or AP, across shoe conditions (p>.05). Our results indicate that the highly cushioned shoes did not show immediate changes in running biomechanics.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 72%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

No immediate effects of highly cushioned shoes on basic running biomechanics

Aminaka

Arthur

Porcari

et al. 2018

Kinesiology (Zagreb, Online)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other varying factors between football boots and running shoes include the built-in cushioning in running shoes as well as the traction features required for football boots due to the more multi-directional manoeuvres performed. It was therefore expected that the range of comfort values obtained in this study using football boots and football movements would be greater than in the previous study of Dinato et al (2014) who used running shoes. In contrast to the hypothesis, a widely distributed weak correlation was also observed in this study, indicating that players were unable to detect overall changes in plantar pressures through comfort.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 65%

“…Several studies have attempted to assess both global and local comfort in different footwear types (Che et al, 1994;Dinato et al, 2014;Hinz et al, 2008;Hong et al, 2005;Jordan and Bartlett, 1995;Mills et al, 2011;Mills et al, 2010). Existing research has studied the relationship between objective global and local plantar pressure measures and subjective self-reported comfort perception measures.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Existing research has studied the relationship between objective global and local plantar pressure measures and subjective self-reported comfort perception measures. Studies on running shoes (Che et al, 1994;Dinato et al, 2014;Wegener et al, 2008) and Casual footwear (Jordan and Bartlett, 1995) have attempted to correlate comfort data of both local foot regions and global overall sensation with peak plantar pressures with inconsistent findings.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Can subjective comfort be used as a measure of plantar pressure in football boots?

Kryger

Jarratt

Mitchell

et al. 2016

Journal of Sports Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Running shoes for preventing lower limb running injuries in adults

Relph

Greaves

Armstrong

et al. 2019

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundLower-limb running injuries are common. Running shoes have been proposed as one means of reducing injury risk. However, there is uncertainty as to how e ective running shoes are for the prevention of injury. It is also unclear how the e ects of di erent characteristics of running shoes prevent injury. ObjectivesTo assess the e ects (benefits and harms) of running shoes for preventing lower-limb running injuries in adult runners. Search methodsWe searched the following databases: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, AMED, CINAHL Plus and SPORTDiscus plus trial registers WHO ICTRP and ClinicalTrials.gov. We also searched additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was June 2021. Selection criteriaWe included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs involving runners or military personnel in basic training that either compared a) a running shoe with a non-running shoe; b) di erent types of running shoes (minimalist, neutral/cushioned, motion control, stability, so midsole, hard midsole); or c) footwear recommended and selected on foot posture versus footwear not recommended and not selected on foot posture for preventing lower-limb running injuries. Our primary outcomes were number of people sustaining a lowerlimb running injury and number of lower-limb running injuries. Our secondary outcomes were number of runners who failed to return to running or their previous level of running, runner satisfaction with footwear, adverse events other than musculoskeletal injuries, and number of runners requiring hospital admission or surgery, or both, for musculoskeletal injury or adverse event. Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently assessed study eligibility and performed data extraction and risk of bias assessment. The certainty of the included evidence was assessed using GRADE methodology. Main resultsWe included 12 trials in the analysis which included a total of 11,240 participants, in trials that lasted from 6 to 26 weeks and were carried out in North America, Europe, Australia and South Africa. Most of the evidence was low or very low certainty as it was not possible to blind runners to their allocated running shoe, there was variation in the definition of an injury and characteristics of footwear, and there were too few studies for most comparisons.

show abstract

Biomechanical variables and perception of comfort in running shoes with different cushioning technologies

Cited by 59 publications

References 22 publications

No immediate effects of highly cushioned shoes on basic running biomechanics

No immediate effects of highly cushioned shoes on basic running biomechanics

Can subjective comfort be used as a measure of plantar pressure in football boots?

Running shoes for preventing lower limb running injuries in adults

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About