A real-time feedback method to reduce loading rate during running: Effect of combining direct and indirect feedback

Garofolini, Alessandro; Oppici, Luca; Taylor, Simon

doi:10.1080/02640414.2020.1788288

Cited by 7 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The results of the Downs and Black Quality Index scores for each study are shown in Table 2 . Of the 37 included studies, 17 were high quality [ 22 , 27 – 42 ], 19 were moderate quality [ 23 , 25 , 26 , 43 – 58 ], and 1 was low quality [ 24 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

What is the Effect of Changing Running Step Rate on Injury, Performance and Biomechanics? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Running-related injuries are prevalent among distance runners. Changing step rate is a commonly used running retraining strategy in the management and prevention of running-related injuries. Objective The aims of this review were to synthesise the evidence relating to the effects of changing running step rate on injury, performance and biomechanics. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data Sources MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and SPORTDiscus. Results Thirty-seven studies were included that related to injury (n = 2), performance (n = 5), and biomechanics (n = 36). Regarding injury, very limited evidence indicated that increasing running step rate is associated with improvements in pain (4 weeks: standard mean difference (SMD), 95% CI 2.68, 1.52 to 3.83; 12 weeks: 3.62, 2.24 to 4.99) and function (4 weeks: 2.31, 3.39 to 1.24); 12 weeks: 3.42, 4.75 to 2.09) in recreational runners with patellofemoral pain. Regarding performance, very limited evidence indicated that increasing step rate increases perceived exertion ( − 0.49, − 0.91 to − 0.07) and awkwardness (− 0.72, − 1.38 to − 0.06) and effort (− 0.69, − 1.34, − 0.03); and very limited evidence that an increase in preferred step rate is associated with increased metabolic energy consumption (− 0.84, − 1.57 to − 0.11). Regarding biomechanics, increasing running step rate was associated with strong evidence of reduced peak knee flexion angle (0.66, 0.40 to 0.92); moderate evidence of reduced step length (0.93, 0.49 to 1.37), peak hip adduction (0.40, 0.11 to 0.69), and peak knee extensor moment (0.50, 0.18 to 0.81); moderate evidence of reduced foot strike angle (0.62, 034 to 0.90); limited evidence of reduced braking impulse (0.64, 0.29 to 1.00), peak hip flexion (0.42, 0.10 to 0.75), and peak patellofemoral joint stress (0.56, 0.07 to 1.05); and limited evidence of reduced negative hip (0.55, 0.20 to 0.91) and knee work (0.84, 0.48 to 1.20). Decreasing running step rate was associated with moderate evidence of increased step length (− 0.76, − 1.31 to − 0.21); limited evidence of increased contact time (− 0.95, − 1.49 to − 0.40), braking impulse (− 0.73, − 1.08 to − 0.37), and negative knee work (− 0.88, − 1.25 to − 0.52); and limited evidence of reduced negative ankle work (0.38, 0.03 to 0.73) and negative hip work (0.49, 0.07 to 0.91). Conclusion In general, increasing running step rate results in a reduction (or no change), and reducing step rate results in an increase (or no change), to kinetic, kinematic, and loading rate variables at the ankle, knee and hip. At present there is insufficient evidence to conclusively determine the effects of altering running step rate on injury and performance. As most studies included in this review investigated the immediate effects of changing running step rate, the longer-term effects remain largely unknown. Prospero Registration CRD42020167657.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

What is the Effect of Changing Running Step Rate on Injury, Performance and Biomechanics? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This aligns well with the idea (expressed in previous section) that a training intervention should create the condition for workers to develop their own understanding of and solution(s) to improve movement to reduce their spine flexion. Furthermore, this strategy likely results in the exploration and stabilization of different movement solutions that can adapt to changes in working circumstances (for examples see Pacheco et al, 2019 ; Garofolini et al, 2020 ).…”

Section: Deliberate Practice Framework and Principles Of Motor Learning For Designing A Training Intervention: A Theoretical Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

Deliberate Practice and Motor Learning Principles to Underpin the Design of Training Interventions for Improving Lifting Movement in the Occupational Sector: A Perspective and a Pilot Study on the Role of Augmented Feedback

Oppici

Grütters

Garofolini

et al. 2021

Front. Sports Act. Living

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Spine posture during repetitive lifting is one of the main risk factors for low-back injuries in the occupational sector. It is thus critical to design appropriate intervention strategies for training workers to improve their posture, reducing load on the spine during lifting. The main approach to train safe lifting to workers has been educational; however, systematic reviews and meta-analyses have shown that this approach does not improve lifting movement nor reduces the risk of low back injury. One of the main limitations of this approach lies in the amount, quality and context of practice of the lifting movement. In this article, first we argue for integrating psychologically-grounded perspectives of practice design in the development of training interventions for safe lifting. Principles from deliberate practice and motor learning are combined and integrated. Given the complexity of lifting, a training intervention should occur in the workplace and invite workers to repeatedly practice/perform the lifting movement with the clear goal of improving their lifting-related body posture. Augmented feedback has a central role in creating the suitable condition for achieving such intervention. Second, we focus on spine bending as risk factor and present a pilot study examining the benefits and boundary conditions of different feedback modalities for reducing bending during lifting. The results showed how feedback modalities meet differently key requirements of deliberate practice conditions, i.e., feedback has to be informative, individualized and actionable. Following the proposed approach, psychology will gain an active role in the development of training interventions, contributing to finding solutions for a reduction of risk factors for workers.

show abstract

Effect of midsole hardness and surface type cushioning on landing impact in heel-strike runners

Yang,

Cui,

Zhou

et al. 2024

Journal of Biomechanics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A real-time feedback method to reduce loading rate during running: Effect of combining direct and indirect feedback

Cited by 7 publications

References 52 publications

What is the Effect of Changing Running Step Rate on Injury, Performance and Biomechanics? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

What is the Effect of Changing Running Step Rate on Injury, Performance and Biomechanics? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Deliberate Practice and Motor Learning Principles to Underpin the Design of Training Interventions for Improving Lifting Movement in the Occupational Sector: A Perspective and a Pilot Study on the Role of Augmented Feedback

Effect of midsole hardness and surface type cushioning on landing impact in heel-strike runners

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About