The current investigation examined running biomechanics in minimal and conventional footwear in two groups of runners who either ran habitually in minimal footwear (habitual minimal footwear users) or habitually in conventional footwear (non-habitual minimal footwear users). We studied ten male non-habitual minimal footwear users and ten male habitual minimal footwear users, who were required to complete ≥35 km per week of training. Lower extremity joint loading was explored using a musculoskeletal simulation approach. Differences between conditions were examined using statistical parametric mapping and 2x2 mixed ANOVA. This study revealed via the strike index that minimal footwear caused a more anterior contact position in both groups (habitual: minimal=61.68% & conventional=46.48% /non-habitual: minimal=33.79% & conventional=22.61%), although non-habitual runners still adopted a rearfoot strike pattern. In addition, in non-habitual users minimal footwear increased tibial accelerations (habitual: minimal=6.35g & conventional=7.06g /non-habitual: minimal=9.54g & conventional=8.16g), loading rates (habitual: minimal=105.44BW/s & conventional=105.97BW/s /non-habitual: minimal=293.00BW/s & conventional=154.36BW/s) and medial tibiofemoral loading rates (habitual: minimal=196.17BW/s & conventional=274.96BW/s /non-habitual: minimal=274.96BW/s & conventional=212.57BW/s). Furthermore, minimal footwear decreased patellofemoral loading in both habitual (minimal=0.28BW•s & conventional=0.31BW•s) and non-habitual (minimal=0.26BW•s & conventional=0.29BW•s) users. Finally, Achilles tendon loading was larger in minimal footwear and in habitual runners (habitual: minimal=0.79BW•s & conventional=0.71BW•s /non-habitual: minimal=0.71BW•s & conventional=0.65BW•s) whereas iliotibial band strain rate was reduced in habitual (minimal=28.32%/s & conventional=30.30%/s) in relation to non-habitual (minimal=42.96%/s & conventional=42.87%/s) users. This study highlights firstly the importance of transitioning to minimal footwear and also indicates that post transition they may be effective in attenuating the biomechanical mechanisms linked to the aetiology of many chronic injuries.

The current study aimed to use a musculoskeletal simulation approach to examine running biomechanics in minimal, maximal and traditional running shoes using a concurrent SPM and Bayesian approach. Thirteen male participants ran over a force platform at 4.0 m/s in minimal maximal and traditional running shoes. Lower extremity joint loading and muscle forces were explored using a musculoskeletal simulation approach. Differences between conditions were examined using statistical parametric mapping (SPM) and Bayesian one-way repeated measures ANOVA. Bayesian analyses showed that traditional running shoes increased vastus intermedius (208.8BWÁms), vastus lateralis (320.2BWÁms) vastus medialis (188.7BWÁms), lateral tibiofemoral (495.9BWÁms) and patellofemoral joint stress (1683.4KPa/BWÁs) integrals compared to minimal running shoes (185.0BWÁms, 281.9BWÁms, 167.2BWÁms, 456.5BWÁms & 1524.9KPa/BWÁs). Furthermore, SPM showed that minimal footwear increased glutaeal, medial tibiofemoral and hip forces during the first 10% of the stance phase and Achilles tendon forces from 20 to 40% stance compared to traditional running shoes, whereas Bayesian analysis showed that minimal footwear increased loading rates (366.9BW/s) compared to maximal and traditional running shoes. (186.5BW/s) and traditional running shoes (161.5BW/s). Finally, SPM also showed that maximal footwear enhanced ankle eversion from 10 to 30% of stance compared to both minimal and traditional running shoes. This study therefore shows that minimal footwear may place runners at increased risk from impact related chronic injuries yet attenuate risk from patellofemoral and lateral tibiofemoral pathologies compared to traditional running shoes. In addition, owing to increases in ankle eversion, maximal running shoes may enhance risk to the aetiology of medial tibial stress syndrome compared to minimal and traditional running shoes.

No abstract

Purpose This study aimed to explore the efficacy of U.S. Montmorency tart cherry in treating recreationally active individuals with patellofemoral pain. Methods Twenty-four recreationally active participants with patellofemoral pain were randomly separated into either placebo (males N = 8, females N = 4, age = 43.30 ± 7.86 yrs, mass = 72.10 ± 17.89 kg, stature = 171.16 ± 10.17, BMI = 24.31 ± 3.75 kg/m2, symptom duration = 30.18 ± 10.90) or Montmorency tart cherry (males N = 9, females N = 3, age = 41.75 ± 7.52 yrs, mass = 76.96 ± 16.64 kg, stature = 173.05 ± 7.63, BMI = 25.53 ± 4.03 kg/m2, symptom duration = 29.73 ± 11.88) groups. Both groups ingested 60 mL of either Montmorency tart cherry concentrate or taste matched placebo daily for 6 weeks. Measures of self-reported pain (KOOS-PF), psychological wellbeing (COOP WONCA), and sleep quality (PSQI) alongside blood biomarkers (C-reactive protein, uric acid, TNF alpha, creatinine, and total antioxidant capacity) and knee biomechanics were quantified at baseline and 6 weeks. Differences between groups were examined using linear mixed-effects models. Results There was 1 withdrawal in the cherry and 0 in the placebo group and no adverse events were noted in either condition. The placebo condition exhibited significant improvements (baseline = 67.90 ± 16.18 & 6 weeks = 78.04 ± 14.83) in KOOS-PF scores compared to the tart cherry group (baseline = 67.28 ± 12.55& 6 weeks = 67.55 ± 20.61). No other statistically significant observations were observed. Conclusion Tart cherry supplementation as specifically ingested in the current investigation does not appear to be effective in mediating improvements in patellofemoral pain symptoms in recreationally active individuals.

CONCLUSION: Increased stance phase could indicate less stability; however, it is unknown if the difference observed in the main effects between the WP and C groups is clinically significant. Higher functioning older adults using GTDs should be cautious of the potential for learned dependence on GTDs for gait stability. Future research should assess the impact of GTDs on older adults with more notable age-related gait decline.