Foot strike and injury rates in endurance runners: a retrospective study.

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

This retrospective study tests if runners who habitually forefoot strike have different rates of injury than runners who habitually rearfoot strike.

Related collections

Most cited references 19

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Endurance running and the evolution of Homo.

Dennis M. Bramble, Daniel Lieberman (2004)

Striding bipedalism is a key derived behaviour of hominids that possibly originated soon after the divergence of the chimpanzee and human lineages. Although bipedal gaits include walking and running, running is generally considered to have played no major role in human evolution because humans, like apes, are poor sprinters compared to most quadrupeds. Here we assess how well humans perform at sustained long-distance running, and review the physiological and anatomical bases of endurance running capabilities in humans and other mammals. Judged by several criteria, humans perform remarkably well at endurance running, thanks to a diverse array of features, many of which leave traces in the skeleton. The fossil evidence of these features suggests that endurance running is a derived capability of the genus Homo, originating about 2 million years ago, and may have been instrumental in the evolution of the human body form.

0 comments Cited 449 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

Ground reaction forces in distance running

Mario A. Lafortune, Peter Cavanagh (1980)

0 comments Cited 147 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

A prospective study of running injuries: the Vancouver Sun Run "In Training" clinics.

D Lloyd, J E Taunton, Jennifer M. Ryan … (2003)

Seventeen running training clinics were investigated to determine the number of injuries that occur in a running programme designed to minimise the injury rate for athletes training for a 10 km race. The relative contributions of factors associated with injury were also reported. A total of 844 primarily recreational runners were surveyed in three trials on the 4th, 8th, and 12th week of the 13 week programme of the "In Training" running clinics. Participants were classified as injured if they experienced at least a grade 1 injury-that is, pain only after running. Logistic regression modelling and odds ratio calculation were performed for each sex using the following predictor variables: age, body mass index (BMI), previous aerobic activity, running frequency, predominant running surface, arch height, running shoe age, and concurrent cross training. Age played an important part in injury in women: being over 50 years old was a risk factor for overall injury, and being less than 31 years was protective against new injury. Running only one day a week showed a non-significant trend for injury risk in men and was a significant risk factor in women and overall injury. A BMI of > 26 kg/m(2) was reported as protective for men. Running shoe age also significantly contributed to the injury model. Half of the participants who reported an injury had had a previous injury; 42% of these reported that they were not completely rehabilitated on starting the 13 week training programme. An injury rate of 29.5% was recorded across all training clinics surveyed. The knee was the most commonly injured site. Although age, BMI, running frequency (days a week), and running shoe age were associated with injury, these results do not take into account an adequate measure of exposure time to injury, running experience, or previous injury and should thus be viewed accordingly. In addition, the reason for the discrepancy in injury rate between these 17 clinics requires further study.