3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Running shoes, pronation, and injuries: do beliefs of injury risk factors among running shoe salespersons and physiotherapy students align with current aetiology frameworks?

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          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.

          Related collections

          Most cited references29

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Injuries to runners

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A framework for the etiology of running-related injuries.

            The etiology of running-related injury is important to consider as the effectiveness of a given running-related injury prevention intervention is dependent on whether etiologic factors are readily modifiable and consistent with a biologically plausible causal mechanism. Therefore, the purpose of the present article was to present an evidence-informed conceptual framework outlining the multifactorial nature of running-related injury etiology. In the framework, four mutually exclusive parts are presented: (a) Structure-specific capacity when entering a running session; (b) structure-specific cumulative load per running session; (c) reduction in the structure-specific capacity during a running session; and (d) exceeding the structure-specific capacity. The framework can then be used to inform the design of future running-related injury prevention studies, including the formation of research questions and hypotheses, as well as the monitoring of participation-related and non-participation-related exposures. In addition, future research applications should focus on addressing how changes in one or more exposures influence the risk of running-related injury. This necessitates the investigation of how different factors affect the structure-specific load and/or the load capacity, and the dose-response relationship between running participation and injury risk. Ultimately, this direction allows researchers to move beyond traditional risk factor identification to produce research findings that are not only reliably reported in terms of the observed cause-effect association, but also translatable in practice.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Meta-Analyses of the Effects of Habitual Running on Indices of Health in Physically Inactive Adults

              Background In order to implement running to promote physical activity, it is essential to quantify the extent to which running improves health. Objective The aim was to summarise the literature on the effects of endurance running on biomedical indices of health in physically inactive adults. Data Sources Electronic searches were conducted in October 2014 on PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, PEDro, the Cochrane Library and LILACS, with no limits of date and language of publication. Study Selection Randomised controlled trials (with a minimum of 8 weeks of running training) that included physically inactive but healthy adults (18–65 years) were selected. The studies needed to compare intervention (i.e. endurance running) and control (i.e. no intervention) groups. Study Appraisal and Synthesis Methods Two authors evaluated study eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias; a third author resolved any uncertainties. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to summarise the estimates for length of training and sex. A dose-response analysis was performed with random-effects meta-regression in order to investigate the relationship between running characteristics and effect sizes. Results After screening 22,380 records, 49 articles were included, of which 35 were used to combine data on ten biomedical indices of health. On average the running programs were composed of 3.7 ± 0.9 sessions/week, 2.3 ± 1.0 h/week, 14.4 ± 5.4 km/week, at 60–90 % of the maximum heart rate, and lasted 21.5 ± 16.8 weeks. After 1 year of training, running was effective in reducing body mass by 3.3 kg [95 % confidence interval (CI) 4.1–2.5], body fat by 2.7 % (95 % CI 5.1–0.2), resting heart rate by 6.7 min−1 (95 % CI 10.3–3.0) and triglycerides by 16.9 mg dl−1 (95 % CI 28.1–5.6). Also, running significantly increased maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max) by 7.1 ml min−1 kg−1 (95 % CI 5.0–9.1) and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol by 3.3 mg dl−1 (95 % CI 1.2–5.4). No significant effect was found for lean body mass, body mass index, total cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol after 1 year of training. In the dose-response analysis, larger effect sizes were found for longer length of training. Limitations It was only possible to combine the data of ten out the 161 outcome measures identified. Lack of information on training characteristics precluded a multivariate model in the dose-response analysis. Conclusions Endurance running was effective in providing substantial beneficial effects on body mass, body fat, resting heart rate, VO2max, triglycerides and HDL cholesterol in physically inactive adults. The longer the length of training, the larger the achieved health benefits. Clinicians and health authorities can use this information to advise individuals to run, and to support policies towards investing in running programs. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40279-015-0359-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                Footwear Science
                Footwear Science
                Informa UK Limited
                1942-4280
                1942-4299
                May 03 2020
                March 03 2020
                May 03 2020
                : 12
                : 2
                : 101-111
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Division of Physiotherapy, Karolinska Institute, Huddinge, Sweden;
                [2 ] Department of Sport and Health Sciences, The Swedish School of Sport and Health Sciences (GIH), Stockholm, Sweden;
                [3 ] Section of Sport Science, Department of Public Health, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark;
                [4 ] Research Unit for General Practice, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark;
                [5 ] School of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Montana, Missoula, MT, USA;
                [6 ] Division of Occupational Therapy & Physical Therapy, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, USA;
                [7 ] School of Health Studies, University of Memphis, Memphis, Tennessee, USA
                Article
                10.1080/19424280.2020.1734869
                85d29aa9-6e93-41d2-a167-c518db321e86
                © 2020
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article