Comparing Leg Quasi-Stiffness Methods Across Running Velocities

Abstract

This study investigated the differences between 5 commonly used methods to calculate leg stiffness over a range of running velocities. Thirteen male, habitually rearfoot, recreational runners ran on a force instrumented treadmill for a 5-minute running session. Each session consisted of 30-second intervals at 6 progressively faster speeds from 2.5 m·s−1 through 5.0 m·s−1 with each interval speed increasing by 0.5 m·s−1. Two-way within-factors repeated-measures analyses of variance were used to evaluate leg stiffness and length. A one-way repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to evaluate the slope of each trend line of each model across speeds. Pearson correlations were used to compare the relationship between the different computational methods. The results indicated that the direct stiffness methods increased with speed whereas the indirect stiffness methods did not. The direct methods were strongly correlated with each other as were the indirect methods. However, there were no strong correlations between the direct and indirect methods. These differences can be mostly attributed to how each individual stiffness method calculated leg length. It is important for researchers to understand these differences when conducting future studies and comparing past studies.