Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation Research Group, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Laboratory for Clinical Motion Analysis, University Hospital Pellenberg, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Sports Biomech. 2022 Jan;21(1):71-84. doi: 10.1080/14763141.2019.1645203. Epub 2019 Aug 29.
There is an ongoing debate regarding the advantages and harms of different running striking patterns. The purpose of this study was to explore the kinematic differences between running with a midfoot- and rearfoot striking (RFS) pattern.Multi-segment foot kinematics of 12 students were assessed while running barefoot at 3.3 m/s (±10%) using a passive optoelectronic motion analysis system. Participants performed multiple running trials while landing on the rearfoot and midfoot. Comparison of the kinematic waveforms was performed using one-dimensional statistical parametric mapping (1DSPM) (paired -test). The inter-segment angle between the shank and calcaneus was found to be significantly more plantar-flexed, more inverted and more adducted in the midfoot striking (MFS) condition compared to the RFS pattern. The calcaneus-midfoot inter-segment angle was found to be more plantar-flexed in the MFS condition. The downward angulation of the metatarsals and the medial longitudinal arch angle in the late swing phase was found to be more pronounced during MFS. Differences between midfoot and RFS patterns occur in the first sub-phase of stance (0-50% of the stance phase).These findings may be of interest for the kinesiopathological or pathokinesiological reasoning processes when facing foot- and lower limb-related running injuries.
关于不同的跑步着地方式(前脚掌着地和后脚掌着地)的优势和危害,一直存在争议。本研究旨在探讨中足和后足(RFS)着地方式的运动学差异。
12 名学生在以 3.3 米/秒(±10%)的速度赤脚跑步时,使用被动式光电运动分析系统评估多节段足部运动学。参与者在以 RFS 模式和中足着地模式下进行多次跑步试验。使用一维统计参数映射(1DSPM)(配对检验)对运动学波形进行比较。与 RFS 模式相比,中足着地(MFS)时,小腿和跟骨之间的节段角度明显更加跖屈、内翻和内收。MFS 时跟骨-中足节段角度更加跖屈。在 MFS 时,在摆动后期,跖骨和内侧纵弓角度的下倾更加明显。中足和 RFS 模式之间的差异发生在支撑相的第一亚相(支撑相的 0-50%)。
当面对与足部和下肢相关的跑步损伤时,这些发现可能与运动病理或病理运动学的推理过程有关。