Pollard Christine D, Ter Har Justin A, Hannigan J J, Norcross Marc F
Program in Kinesiology, Oregon State University-Cascades, Bend, Oregon, USA.
School of Biological and Population Health Sciences, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, USA.
Orthop J Sports Med. 2018 Jun 7;6(6):2325967118775720. doi: 10.1177/2325967118775720. eCollection 2018 Jun.
Lower extremity injuries are common among runners. Recent trends in footwear have included minimal and maximal running shoe types. Maximal running shoes are unique because they provide the runner with a highly cushioned midsole in both the rearfoot and forefoot. However, little is known about how maximal shoes influence running biomechanics.
To examine the influence of maximal running shoes on biomechanics before and after a 5-km (5K) run as compared with neutral running shoes.
Controlled laboratory study.
Fifteen female runners participated in 2 testing sessions (neutral shoe session and maximal shoe session), with 7 to 10 days between sessions. Three-dimensional kinematic and kinetic data were collected while participants ran along a 10-m runway. After 5 running trials, participants completed a 5K treadmill run, followed by 5 additional running trials. Variables of interest included impact peak of the vertical ground-reaction force, loading rate, and peak eversion. Differences were determined by use of a series of 2-way repeated-measures analysis of variance models (shoe × time).
A significant main effect was found for shoe type for impact peak and loading rate. When the maximal shoe was compared with the neutral shoe before and after the 5K run, participants exhibited an increased loading rate (mean ± SE: pre-maximal shoe, 81.15 body weights/second [BW/s] and pre-neutral shoe, 60.83 BW/s [ < .001]; post-maximal shoe, 79.10 BW/s and post-neutral shoe, 61.22 BW/s [ = .008]) and increased impact peak (pre-maximal shoe, 1.76 BW and pre-neutral shoe, 1.58 BW [ = .004]; post-maximal shoe, 1.79 BW and post-neutral shoe, 1.55 BW [ = .003]). There were no shoe × time interactions and no significant findings for peak eversion.
Runners exhibited increased impact forces and loading rate when running in a maximal versus neutral shoe. Because increases in these variables have been associated with an increased risk of running-related injuries, runners who are new to running in a maximal shoe may be at an increased risk of injury.
Understanding the influence of running footwear as an intervention that affects running biomechanics is important for clinicians so as to reduce patient injury.
下肢损伤在跑步者中很常见。近期鞋类的发展趋势包括极简型和极 cushioned 型跑鞋。极 cushioned 型跑鞋很独特，因为它们在鞋跟和前脚掌都为跑步者提供了高度缓冲的中底。然而，对于极 cushioned 型跑鞋如何影响跑步生物力学知之甚少。
与中性跑鞋相比，研究极 cushioned 型跑鞋在 5 公里（5K）跑步前后对生物力学的影响。
对照实验室研究。
15 名女性跑步者参加了 2 次测试（中性鞋测试和极 cushioned 型鞋测试），两次测试之间间隔 7 至 10 天。当参与者沿着 10 米跑道跑步时，收集三维运动学和动力学数据。在进行 5 次跑步试验后，参与者完成 5K 跑步机跑步，然后再进行 5 次跑步试验。感兴趣的变量包括垂直地面反作用力的冲击峰值、负荷率和外翻峰值。差异通过一系列双因素重复测量方差分析模型（鞋型×时间）来确定。
发现鞋型对冲击峰值和负荷率有显著的主效应。将极 cushioned 型鞋与中性鞋在 5K 跑步前后进行比较时，参与者的负荷率增加（平均值±标准误：极 cushioned 型鞋前，81.15 体重/秒[BW/s]，中性鞋前，60.83 BW/s[<.001]；极 cushioned 型鞋后，79.10 BW/s，中性鞋后，61.22 BW/s[=.008]），冲击峰值增加（极 cushioned 型鞋前，1.76 BW，中性鞋前，1.58 BW[=.004]；极 cushioned 型鞋后，1.79 BW，中性鞋后，1.55 BW[=.003]）。没有鞋型×时间的交互作用，外翻峰值也没有显著结果。
与中性鞋相比，跑步者穿极 cushioned 型鞋跑步时冲击力和负荷率增加。由于这些变量的增加与跑步相关损伤风险的增加有关，刚开始穿极 cushioned 型鞋跑步的跑步者可能受伤风险增加。
了解跑鞋作为一种影响跑步生物力学的干预措施的影响，对临床医生来说很重要，以便减少患者受伤。
