Immediate and short-term adaptations to maximalist and minimalist running shoes

Agresta, Cristine; Kessler, Sarah; Southern, Emily; Goulet, Grant C.; Zernicke, Ronald F.; Zendler, Jessica Deneweth

doi:10.1080/19424280.2018.1460624

Cited by 18 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…All runners included in this analysis successfully transitioned to running 100% of their mileage in the maximal shoe for the final 2 weeks of the 6-week acclimation period. During a 4-week acclimation study where runners exclusively wore maximal shoes, Agresta et al 1 also found no biomechanical changes over time in foot strike angle, spatiotemporal parameters, leg accelerations, or leg stiffness. It is possible that an acclimation period longer than 4 to 6 weeks is required to see biomechanical changes during running, such as a reduction in vGRF parameters.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Also, while we required all participants to run at the same pace (8 min/mile), other studies had participants run at a self-selected pace. 1,2,8 The rockered midsole design of the maximal shoe is also noteworthy: while a rockered shoe has not been shown to affect vGRF parameters, 6 more evidence is needed in this area. Regardless, since the AVLR and VIP found in the current study were drastically higher than previous studies, 2,8 we recommend that researchers not consider all maximal shoes the same.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other studies did not find differences in the AVLR or VIP between maximal and traditional running shoes. 1,2,8 This may be attributed to the fact that these studies used different maximal and traditional shoes. Also, while we required all participants to run at the same pace (8 min/mile), other studies had participants run at a self-selected pace.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A previous study found that both before and after a 5-km run on the treadmill, the average vertical loading rate (AVLR) and vertical impact peak (VIP) of the vertical ground-reaction force (vGRF) were higher in the maximal shoe as compared to a traditional shoe during overground running, 21 which may increase the risk of injury. 7,10,15,19,31 However, other research found no differences in vGRF measures between maximal and traditional shoes 1,2 or that differences existed only during downhill running. 8 These conflicting results could be related to the specific maximal and traditional shoes used in each study.…”

mentioning

confidence: 94%

“…2,8,21,25,26 While 1 study examined the effect of a 4-week transition to maximal running shoes, this study did not report the effect of time on ground-reaction forces or ankle kinematics. 1 It is currently unknown whether a longer acclimation period would affect these biomechanical variables. Thus, the primary purpose of the study was to examine the effect of a 6-week transition to maximal footwear on running biomechanics (ground-reaction forces and ankle kinematics) and to compare running biomechanics between maximal and traditional running shoes.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

A 6-Week Transition to Maximal Running Shoes Does Not Change Running Biomechanics

Hannigan

Pollard

2019

Am J Sports Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: A recent study suggested that maximal running shoes may increase the impact force and loading rate of the vertical ground-reaction force during running. It is currently unknown whether runners will adapt to decrease the impact force and loading rate over time. Purpose: To compare the vertical ground-reaction force and ankle kinematics between maximal and traditional shoes before and after a 6-week acclimation period to the maximal shoe. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Participants ran in a traditional running shoe and a maximal running shoe during 2 testing sessions 6 weeks apart. During each session, 3-dimensional kinematics and kinetics were collected during overground running. Variables of interest included the loading rate, impact peak, and active peak of the vertical ground-reaction force, as well as eversion and dorsiflexion kinematics. Two-way repeated measures analyses of variance compared data within participants. Results: No significant differences were observed in any biomechanical variable between time points. The loading rate and impact peak were higher in the maximal shoe. Runners were still everted at toe-off and landed with less dorsiflexion, on average, in the maximal shoe. Conclusion: Greater loading rates and impact forces were previously found in maximal running shoes, which may indicate an increased risk of injury. The eversion mechanics observed in the maximal shoes may also increase the risk of injury. A 6-week transition to maximal shoes did not significantly change any of these measures. Clinical Relevance: Maximal running shoes are becoming very popular and may be considered a treatment option for some injuries. The biomechanical results of this study do not support the use of maximal running shoes. However, the effect of these shoes on pain and injury rates is unknown.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 94%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

A 6-Week Transition to Maximal Running Shoes Does Not Change Running Biomechanics

Hannigan

Pollard

2019

Am J Sports Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Low back pain among Italian runners: A cross-sectional survey

Maselli

Esculier

Storari

et al. 2021

Physical Therapy in Sport

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Joint coordination when running in minimalist, neutral, and ultra-cushioning shoes

Borgia

Silvernail

Becker

2020

Journal of Sports Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ultra-cushioning (ULTRA) shoes are relatively new to the running shoe market. While several studies have evaluated joint kinematics and kinetics when running in ULTRA shoes, to date it remains unknown how such shoes influence joint coordination. Therefore the purpose of this study was to evaluate lower extremity coordination and coordination variability when running in minimalist (MIN), traditional (NEUT) and ULTRA shoes. Fifteen recreational runners ran for ten minutes in each shoe type. Lower extremity coordination patterns and coordination variability were assessed for rearfoot-tibia, rearfoot-knee, and tibia-knee couplings using a modified vector coding method during early, mid, and late stance periods. During late stance the ULTRA shoes results in more antiphase coordination than the MIN (p = .036) or NEUT (p = .047) shoes and less in-phase coordination than the MIN (p = .048) or NEUT (p = .013) shoes.During late stance there was also more proximal phase rearfoot-knee coordination in the ULTRA shoes than in either the MIN (p = .039) or the NEUT (p = .005) shoes and less in-phase coordination in the ULTRA shoes than in the NEUT shoes (p = .006). There were no differences in coordination variability between shoes during any phase. The differences in coordination may have implications for tissue loading and injury development when running in ULTRA shoes.

show abstract

Immediate and short-term adaptations to maximalist and minimalist running shoes

Cited by 18 publications

References 43 publications

A 6-Week Transition to Maximal Running Shoes Does Not Change Running Biomechanics

A 6-Week Transition to Maximal Running Shoes Does Not Change Running Biomechanics

Low back pain among Italian runners: A cross-sectional survey

Joint coordination when running in minimalist, neutral, and ultra-cushioning shoes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About