Changes

The Science of Running Shoes

1,208 bytes added, 21:37, 4 December 2014
no edit summary
''Main article: [[The Science of Running Economy]]''
Studies have consistently shown that heavier shoes reduce running economy<ref name="LussianaFabre2013"/><ref name="Burkett-1985"/><ref name="Sobhani-2014"/><ref name="Wierzbinski-2011"/>. Each 100g/3.5oz added to the weight of each shoe reduces running economy by about 1%<ref name="Franz-2012"/><ref name="Wierzbinski-2011"/><ref name="Frederick 1985"/><ref name="Frederick-1984"/>. Studies of cushioning and Running Economy have provided conflicting information. I believe this conflict is due to some studies using a cushioned treadmill to compare barefoot and shod conditions. Not surprisingly, if a study uses a cushioned treadmill, the cushioning provided by the shoe does not confer any additional advantage over the barefoot condition. Analyzing the research, I conclude that a well cushioned running shoe can improve Running Economy by an estimated 2-3.5% compared with a weight matched un-cushioned shoe<ref name="Franz-2012"/><ref name="Wierzbinski-2011"/><ref name="Tung-2014"/>. Note that running shoes provide less cushioning in colder temperatures<ref name="DibSmith2005"/>.
=Minimalist & Barefoot Running=
Most research looks at factors that might be related to injury risk, rather than injury rates directly. I found no studies that evaluated barefoot or minimalist running and injury rates. So while barefoot and minimalist running tends to have lower impact, it's unclear if this will have any bearing on injury rates. Of greater concern is some compelling evidence that the transition to barefoot or minimalist footwear is correlated with higher injury rates, especially stress fractures in the foot.
** Compared with barefoot, running shoes reduced the ability to estimate surface angle, with a greater estimation error with thicker shoes<ref name="Sekizawa-2001"/><ref name="Robbins-1995"/>.
* There are some instances of Metatarsal Stress fractures in runners who had changed to minimalist shoes, with no other changes in their training habits<ref name="GiulianiMasini2011"/>.
* A study of 99 runners were randomly assigned a traditional cushioned shoe (Nike Pegasus), partial-minimalist shoes (Nike Free 3.0 V.2) or minimalist shoes (Vibram 5-Finger Bikila)<ref name="RyanElashi2013"/>. The runners had a minimum of 5 years' experience and had no injuries in the previous 6 months. The runners took part in a 12 week training program in which they gradually adopted their assigned footwear. They increased their time in the assigned footware footwear from 10 min (19%) in week 1 to 115 min (58%) in week 12. ** Runners in the two minimalist traditional shoes had a greater rate lower incident of injury compared (#4/32 runners) than the partially minimalist (#12/32 runner) or minimalist (#7/35 runners). ** The only statistically significant difference in pain scores for the shoe conditions was in shin and calf pain, with runners in the partially minimalist and minimalist shoes having greater pain scores than the traditional shoes. Runners with However, the underlying data is a little more complex. Below are shown the pain scores before and after the trial for each shoe type. As you can see, the pain goes up by the partly minimal shoes (Nike Free) had greatest percentage for the highest overall injury ratepartially minimalist, but this rise is from a much lower initial level. Runners in The absolute level of pain is lowest for the partially minimalist shoes condition, making this study tricky to interpret. {| class="wikitable"! Time! Traditional! Partial Minimalist! Minimalist|-| Baseline| 7.3 (9.7)| 4.9 (6.8)| 5 Fingers.3 (11.8) had the greatest shin and calf pain|-| 12 weeks| 18.4 (13.9)| 13.9 (9.6)| 28.8 (22. 3|}
* A study looked at bone marrow edema in 36 experienced runners transitioning to Vibram FiveFingers (VFF) shoes<ref name="RidgeJohnson2013"/>. The runners were randomly assigned VFF or their normal running shoes, with the VFF runners gradually transitioning based on the recommendations of Vibram at that time. Only 1 of the 17 runners in the control group showed signs of a bone marrow edema, compared with 9 of the 19 VFF runners.
* In 2014, Vibram settled a lawsuit that they made false and unsubstantiated claims that their FiveFingers shoes could reduce injury rates.
<ref name="Frederick-1984">Frederick, E. C., Physiological and ergonomics factors in running shoe design. Applied Ergonomics 15(4): 281-287, 1984</ref>
<ref name="Frederick 1985">Frederick , E. C. The energy cost of load carriage on the feet during running. In: Winter, D.A., R. W. Norman, R. P. Wells, K. C. Hayes, and A. E. Patla (Editors), Biomechanics IX-B Human Kinetics Publ., Champaign, IL, pp.295-300, 1985</ref>
<ref name="DibSmith2005">Mansour Y Dib, Jay Smith, Kathie A Bernhardt, Kenton R Kaufman, Kevin A Miles, Effect of Environmental Temperature on Shock Absorption Properties of Running Shoes, Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine, volume 15, issue 3, 2005, pages 172–176, ISSN [http://www.worldcat.org/issn/1050-642X 1050-642X], doi [http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/01.jsm.0000165348.32767.32 10.1097/01.jsm.0000165348.32767.32]</ref>
<references/>
[[Category:Science]]
[[Category:Injury]]
50
edits