Control of impact loading during distracted running before and after gait retraining in runners

Cheung, Roy T.H.; An, Winko W.; Au, Ivan P.H.; Zhang, Janet H.; Chan, Zoe Y. S.; MacPhail, Aislinn Joan Campbell

doi:10.1080/02640414.2017.1398886

Cited by 20 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Hence, a replication of the study by Cheung et al [7] but using auditory feedback may provide insight on the level of motor learning using different sensory modalities in gait retraining. Specifically, this study sought to compare the impact loading during distracted running before and after a course of auditory feedback gait retraining.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 75%

“…The overall design of the present study referred to Cheung et al [7]. Specifically, it is a cross-over study involving a laboratory-based gait retraining program using auditory feedback.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They were free from any active injury twelve months before the experiment, and had received no prior lower extremity surgery. In order to avoid floor effect, participants exhibited PPA S < 8 g during self-paced running were excluded [7]. Experimental procedures were reviewed and approved by the concerning institutional review board.…”

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Real time auditory feedback gait retraining is effective in impact loading reduction, even when the runners were distracted. level of attentional capacity, a recent study has examined the effectiveness of visual biofeedback gait retraining by challenging the participants with an additional cognitive task [7]. Interestingly, they found beneficial influences of the augmented visual feedback not only before but also after gait retraining during dual-tasking.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Specifically, this study sought to compare the impact loading during distracted running before and after a course of auditory feedback gait retraining. Based on the previous findings [7], we hypothesized that participants would present a lower impact loading, as measured by PPA at shoe (PPA S ), PPA at distal tibia (PPA T ), VALR and VILR, at the completion of gait retraining, when they were distracted.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Impact Loading During Distracted Running Before and After Auditory Gait Retraining

Ching

et al. 2018

Int J Sports Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Visual feedback gait retraining has been reported to successfully reduce impact loading in runners, even when the runners were distracted. However, auditory feedback is more feasible in real life application. Hence, this study compared the peak positive acceleration (PPA), vertical average (VALR) and instantaneous (VILR) loading rate during distracted running before and after a course of auditory feedback gait retraining in 16 runners. The runners were asked to land with softer footfalls with and without auditory feedback. Low or high sound pitch was generated according to the impact of particular footfall, when compared with the preset target. Runners then received a course of auditory gait retraining, and after the gait retraining, runners completed a reassessment. Runners before gait retraining exhibited lower PPA, VALR and VILR with augmented auditory feedback (p<0.049). We found a reduction in PPA, VALR and VILR after gait retraining, regardless of the presence of feedback (p<0.018). However, runners after gait retraining did not demonstrate further reduction in PPA and VALR with auditory feedback (p>0.104). A small effect of auditory feedback on VILR in runners after gait retraining was observed (p=0.032). Real time auditory feedback gait retraining is effective in impact loading reduction, even when the runners were distracted.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 75%

“…The overall design of the present study referred to Cheung et al [7]. Specifically, it is a cross-over study involving a laboratory-based gait retraining program using auditory feedback.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Impact Loading During Distracted Running Before and After Auditory Gait Retraining

Ching

et al. 2018

Int J Sports Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Wearables for Running Gait Analysis: A Systematic Review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Running gait assessment has traditionally been performed using subjective observation or expensive laboratory-based objective technologies, such as three-dimensional motion capture or force plates. However, recent developments in wearable devices allow for continuous monitoring and analysis of running mechanics in any environment. Objective measurement of running gait is an important (clinical) tool for injury assessment and provides measures that can be used to enhance performance. Objectives We aimed to systematically review the available literature investigating how wearable technology is being used for running gait analysis in adults. Methods A systematic search of the literature was conducted in the following scientific databases: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and SPORTDiscus. Information was extracted from each included article regarding the type of study, participants, protocol, wearable device(s), main outcomes/measures, analysis and key findings. Results A total of 131 articles were reviewed: 56 investigated the validity of wearable technology, 22 examined the reliability and 77 focused on applied use. Most studies used inertial measurement units (n = 62) [i.e. a combination of accelerometers, gyroscopes and magnetometers in a single unit] or solely accelerometers (n = 40), with one using gyroscopes alone and 31 using pressure sensors. On average, studies used one wearable device to examine running gait. Wearable locations were distributed among the shank, shoe and waist. The mean number of participants was 26 (± 27), with an average age of 28.3 (± 7.0) years. Most studies took place indoors (n = 93), using a treadmill (n = 62), with the main aims seeking to identify running gait outcomes or investigate the effects of injury, fatigue, intrinsic factors (e.g. age, sex, morphology) or footwear on running gait outcomes. Generally, wearables were found to be valid and reliable tools for assessing running gait compared to reference standards. Conclusions This comprehensive review highlighted that most studies that have examined running gait using wearable sensors have done so with young adult recreational runners, using one inertial measurement unit sensor, with participants running on a treadmill and reporting outcomes of ground contact time, stride length, stride frequency and tibial acceleration. Future studies are required to obtain consensus regarding terminology, protocols for testing validity and the reliability of devices and suitability of gait outcomes. Clinical Trial Registration CRD42021235527.

show abstract

Evaluation of impact-shock on gait after the implementation of two different training programs in older adults

Sanchis-Sanchis

Blasco-Lafarga

Camilo

et al. 2020

Clinical Biomechanics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Gait is negatively affected with increasing age. It is widely accepted that training produces physical-functional improvements in older adults, which can be assessed with numerous physical-functional tests. However, very few studies have been carried out using accelerometry to analyse the training effect on kinetic and kinematic variables in older adults, and there is no one that investigate the effects of two different training programs. Therefore, the aim of this study is to analyse the effects of an interval-walking program and a multicomponent program on the acceleration impacts, shock attenuation, step-length, stride frequency, and gait speed in older adults. Methods: 23 participants were divided into multicomponent training group [n = 12, 7 female, 71.58 (4.56) years] and interval-walking group [n = 11, 6 female, 69.64 (3.56) years]. We evaluated the participants using three triaxial accelerometers, placing one on the distal end of each tibia and one on the forehead. Findings: After 14 weeks' of training, the maximum acceleration values both for the head accelerometer and for the non-dominant tibia, as well as the attenuation in the same leg, increased in the multicomponent training group. The maximum acceleration values for the head and the stride frequency also increased in the intervalwalking group. Lower limb strength improved in both groups. Interpretation: Given the benefits we found for each of these programs, we encourage their consideration when planning older adults training programs and suggest that multicomponent programs should be introduced prior to the start of walking-based programs.

show abstract

Control of impact loading during distracted running before and after gait retraining in runners

Cited by 20 publications

References 20 publications

Impact Loading During Distracted Running Before and After Auditory Gait Retraining

Impact Loading During Distracted Running Before and After Auditory Gait Retraining

Wearables for Running Gait Analysis: A Systematic Review

Evaluation of impact-shock on gait after the implementation of two different training programs in older adults

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About