Patellofemoral pain (PFP) is one of the most prevalent injuries in runners. Unfortunately, a substantial part of injured athletes do not recover fully from PFP in the long-term. Although previous studies have shown positive effects of gait retraining in this condition, retraining protocols often lack clinical applicability because they are time-consuming, costly for patients and require a treadmill. The primary objective of this study will be to compare the effects of two different two-week partially supervised gait retraining programs, with a control intervention; on pain, function and lower limb kinematics of runners with PFP. It will be a single-blind randomized clinical trial with six-month follow-up. The study will be composed of three groups: a group focusing on impact (group A), a group focusing on cadence (group B), and a control group that will not perform any intervention (group C). The primary outcome measure will be pain assessed using the Visual Analog Pain scale during running. Secondary outcomes will include pain during daily activities (usual), symptoms assessed using the Patellofemoral Disorders Scale and lower limb running kinematics in the frontal (contralateral pelvic drop; hip adduction) and sagittal planes (foot inclination; tibia inclination; ankle dorsiflexion; knee flexion) assessed using the MyoResearch 3.14—MyoVideo (Noraxon U.S.A. Inc.). The study outcomes will be evaluated before (t0), immediately after (t2), and six months (t24) after starting the protocol. Our hypothesis is that both partially supervised gait retraining programs will be more effective in reducing pain, improving symptoms, and modifying lower limb kinematics during running compared with the control group, and that the positive effects from these programs will persist for six months. Also, we believe that one gait retraining group will not be superior to the other. Results from this study will help improve care in runners with PFP, while maximizing clinical applicability as well as time and cost-effectiveness.

Introduction: Muscle strength has shown different responses to the cooling of neuromuscular tissue and its behavior is still unclear. Objective: To verify the behavior of maximum grip strength before and after forearm cooling. Methods: The cooling intervention consisted of immersing the forearm up to the elbow in water cooled to 10° C. Grip strength was assessed using a dynamometer prior to cooling, immediately after immersion, and at 5, 10 and 30 minutes of forearm exposure to ambient temperature (recovery phase) concomitantly to measurement of skin surface temperature. The sample consisted of 30 healthy individuals. Results: Grip strength decreased significantly (p < 0.05) between the period prior to cooling and all the time intervals following immersion in ice water. There was also a gradual increase in grip strength during the recovery phase, with significant differences (p < 0.05) between the mean immediately after immersion and means at 5, 15 and 30 minutes after exposure to ambient temperature. Conclusion: The results indicate that immersion in ice water (10ºC) for 15 minutes significantly reduced (p < 0.05) grip strength for up to 30 minutes after forearm cooling. Strength also recovered progressively after removal of the cold stimulus. Further research is needed to obtain definitive results regarding the effects of cooling on muscle strength in healthy individuals.

Some treatment modalities have been used to prevent or treat running-related musculoskeletal injuries, among them, gait retraining. This study aimed to evaluate street runners’ knowledge, interest, and preference for gait retraining programs and assess if these aspects differ between runners with and without history of injury. This is a cross-sectional study with 100 runners. Initially, a text showing what gait retraining was about was presented to participants. Then, they answered questions about their knowledge (yes x no) and interest (yes x no) on the programs. Subsequently, a text showing how fully and partially supervised programs would be conducted was offered to participants. Then, they reported their preference for one of them (fully x partially supervised). We found that most athletes were unaware of gait retraining programs (69.8%), though they showed great interest in performing them after explanation (87.1%). We observed no preference for a fully (48.2%) or partially supervised (51.8%) protocol. We also found a statistical difference in knowledge (p=0.029) in favor of participants with history of injury. Despite the growing evidence available, we observed that most runners lack any prior knowledge of this modality. Due to the great interest and lack of preference for different protocols shown, we suggest that healthcare providers who treat this population offer the programs described to patients.