Differences in injury risk and characteristics of injuries between novice and experienced runners over a 4-year period

Kemler, Ellen; Blokland, Donna; Backx, Frank; Huisstede, Bionka M. A.

doi:10.1080/00913847.2018.1507410

Cited by 60 publications

(61 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Running is one of the most popular exercise activities in the world [4,5], and is known for its health benefits [10,11]. Unfortunately, running also has high dropout rates due to injuries and demotivation [14][15][16][17][18][19][20]. Running-related technology such as sports watches and apps have great potential to support runners in their training activities [26,27], guide them in running injury-free, and motivate them.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Unfortunately, dropout rates are high due to running-related injuries and demotivation [14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21]. In line with the growing dropout rates, in recent years there has been an exponential increase in the availability and use of sports and physical activity-related monitoring devices such as mobile applications (apps), watches, and activity trackers, which claim to support runners [22][23][24][25].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Understanding Different Types of Recreational Runners and How They Use Running-Related Technology

Janssen

Walravens

Thibaut

et al. 2020

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aims to help professionals in the field of running and running-related technology (i.e., sports watches and smartphone applications) to address the needs of runners. It investigates the various runner types—in terms of their attitudes, interests, and opinions (AIOs) with regard to running—and studies how they differ in the technology they use. Data used in this study were drawn from the standardized online Eindhoven Running Survey 2016 (ERS2016). In total, 3723 participants completed the questionnaire. Principal component analysis and cluster analysis were used to identify the different running types, and crosstabs obtained insights into the use of technology between different typologies. Based on the AIOs, four distinct runner types were identified: casual individual, social competitive, individual competitive, and devoted runners. Subsequently, we related the types to their use of sports watches and apps. Our results show a difference in the kinds of technology used by different runner types. Differentiation between types of runners can be useful for health professionals, policymakers involved in public health, engineers, and trainers or coaches to adapt their services to specific segments, in order to make use of the full potential of running-related systems to support runners to stay active and injury-free and contribute to a healthy lifestyle.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding Different Types of Recreational Runners and How They Use Running-Related Technology

Janssen

Walravens

Thibaut

et al. 2020

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Overall, we suggest that real-time feedback on running technique is primarily relevant for individuals with a current or frequently returning injury, or exhibit a technique that increases their injury risk. Novice runners have a greater injury risk (Buist et al, 2010;Kemler, Blokland, Backx, & Huisstede, 2018) and show larger differences between their preferred and optimal economical running technique (de Ruiter et al, 2014) compared with experienced runners. Novice runners may therefore benefit most from real-time feedback on running technique.…”

Section: Challenges In Modifying Running Technique With Real-time Feementioning

confidence: 99%

Real-time feedback by wearables in running: Current approaches, challenges and suggestions for improvements

Hooren

Goudsmit

Restrepo

et al. 2019

Journal of Sports Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Injuries and lack of motivation are common reasons for discontinuation of running. Real-time feedback from wearables can reduce discontinuation by reducing injury risk and improving performance and motivation. There are however several limitations and challenges with current real-time feedback approaches. We discuss these limitations and challenges and provide a framework to optimise realtime feedback for reducing injury risk and improving performance and motivation. We first discuss the reasons why individuals run and propose that feedback targeted to these reasons can improve motivation and compliance. Secondly, we review the association of running technique and running workload with injuries and performance and we elaborate how real-time feedback on running technique and workload can be applied to reduce injury risk and improve performance and motivation. We also review different feedback modalities and motor learning feedback strategies and their application to real-time feedback. Briefly, the most effective feedback modality and frequency differ between variables and individuals, but a combination of modalities and mixture of real-time and delayed feedback is most effective. Moreover, feedback promoting perceived competence, autonomy and an external focus can improve motivation, learning and performance. Although the focus is on wearables, the challenges and practical applications are also relevant for laboratory-based gait retraining.

show abstract

“…Worldwide, running is one of the ve most popular sports activities among adults and one of the most favourite sports for starting to become physically active 1 . In the Netherlands, around 30% of the running population consists of novice runners who have less than one year of running experience 2 .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The incidence of running-related injuries (RRIs) is reported to range from three to 59 injuries per 1000 exposure hours [3][4][5] . In particular, novice runners are at high risk of sustaining a RRI, especially in the lower extremities 2,3,6 . Risk factors for RRIs have been extensively investigated, but evidence remains contradictory and inconclusive.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The effectiveness of an online intervention in stimulating injury-preventive behaviour in adult novice runners. Results of a randomised controlled trial.

Kemler

Cornelissen

Gouttebarge

2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background In addition to the beneficial health effects of being active, running is also associated with a risk of sustaining injuries. The online intervention Runfitcheck was developed to stimulate injury-preventive behaviour among adult novice runners. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of Runfitcheck on injury-preventive behaviour among adult novice runners. Design Randomised controlled trial Methods A randomised controlled trial with a follow-up period of five months was conducted among adult novice runners. The intervention group had access to the Runfitcheck intervention, while the control group performed their running activities as usual. One, three, and five months after enrolment, participants reported retrospectively what they had done regarding injury-preventive behaviour (operationalised as (i) using a (personalised) training schedule; (ii) performing strength and technique exercises; and (iii) performing a warm-up routine prior to running). Relative Risks ((RR) and 95% Confidence Interval (95%CI)) were used to analyse behavioural change among runners who were not performing the favourable behaviour at enrolment. Results A total of 1,411 novice runners (72.6% female, mean age 38.1 years) were included in this study and assigned to the intervention group (n=715) or control group (n=696). Runners in the intervention group searched more often for information about a warm-up routine (55.6% versus 44.9%; RR 1.211 (95%CI 1.080-1.357); Table 2), and added more often strength exercises to their warm-up routine (49.3% versus 38.2%; RR 1.228 (95%CI 1.092-1.380)). Runners in the intervention group performed more often running technique exercises compared to runners in the control group (58.6% versus 51.5%; RR 1.134 (95%CI 1.015-1.267)), but less often strength exercises (71.9% versus 77.9%; RR 0.865 (95%CI 0.752-0.995)). Within the group of runners that did not perform any warm-up routine at enrolment (n=272; 69.5% female, mean age 35.8 years (SD 9.3), runners in the intervention group performed a regular warm-up routine more often than runners in the control group (47.1% versus 28.4%; n=196; RR 1.461 (95%CI 1.084-1.968)) No significant results were found for using a training schedule. Conclusions The online intervention Runfitcheck was effective in stimulating aspects of injury-preventive behaviour in adult novice runners, mostly related to a warm-up routine.

show abstract

Differences in injury risk and characteristics of injuries between novice and experienced runners over a 4-year period

Cited by 60 publications

References 30 publications

Understanding Different Types of Recreational Runners and How They Use Running-Related Technology

Understanding Different Types of Recreational Runners and How They Use Running-Related Technology

Real-time feedback by wearables in running: Current approaches, challenges and suggestions for improvements

The effectiveness of an online intervention in stimulating injury-preventive behaviour in adult novice runners. Results of a randomised controlled trial.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About