Differences in Mechanical Midsole Characteristics of Running Shoes Do Not Influence Physiological Variables in Aerobic and Anaerobic Running

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine the influence of footwear stiffness and energy loss on oxygen uptake and heart rate in athletes running under aerobic and anaerobic conditions. Four footwear conditions with identical outsoles, insoles, upper materials, but different mechanical properties regarding polyurethane midsole materials were investigated. Respective midsole material characteristics were selected to represent a wide range of running shoes. The test procedure for eighteen well‐trained male runners was divided into three treadmill testing sessions: an incremental ramp protocol to estimate the individual ventilatory threshold (day 1), a test with 6‐minute stages in each shoe at 70% (aerobic, day 2) and 102% (anaerobic, day 3) of the participant’s ventilatory threshold. For oxygen uptake and the heart rate, no significant differences between footwear conditions were found for either running condition. Furthermore, no significant relationships between physiological variables and mechanical midsole characteristics were found. The wide range of significant stiffness differences in the rearfoot (52.7 N/mm) and forefoot areas (50.7 N/mm), as well as significant differences of the shoe midsole material energy loss in the rearfoot (18.8%) and forefoot areas (10.7%) were too low to influence physiological variables significantly when running below and slightly above the ventilatory threshold. It seems that shoe mass and shoe comfort can influence physiological variables more than the mechanical midsole characteristics of stiffness and energy loss. These results may have practical implications for shoe manufacturers, coaches, and athletes, alike.

Influence of Shoe Mass on Performance and Running Economy in Trained Runners

“…For example, Fuller et al (2016) suggested that apart from shoe mass, other factors not analyzed in the current study, may influence RE (i.e., shoe cushioning). However, previous research reported similar VO 2 and HR values in runners using shoes with different midsole characteristics but with similar shoe mass (Mitschke et al, 2019), indicating that shoe mass may be the most relevant variable when analyzing the influence of footwear on RE. In addition, the TTE was performed after the submaximal test (warm-up), and therefore, the participants could have accumulated fatigue that may have affected the TTE test performance.…”

Can the Entire Function of the Foot Be Concentrated in the Forefoot Area during the Running Stance Phase? A Finite Element Study of Different Shoe Soles

“…On the contrary, when considering the perspective of kinematics, it is important to note that the applicability of MBT shoes is restricted to specific scenarios or individuals, rather than being generally suitable for every person. In contrast, the frontal plane is responsible for the most notable alterations in the kinematics of the lower limbs during walking and running ( Gu et al, 2014 ; Mei et al, 2015 ; Mitschke et al, 2019 ). This is due to its resemblance to the structure of a barefoot and its consequential influence on biomechanical outcomes.…”