Reduced Eccentric Loading of the Knee with the Pose Running Method

Arendse, R.; Noakes, Timothy D.; Azevedo, Liane B.; Romanov, Nicholas; Schwellnus, Martin; Fletcher, Graham

doi:10.1249/01.mss.0000113684.61351.b0

Cited by 79 publications

(85 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, the greater knee excursion of the RS runners contributed to their having to generate greater KENW and attenuating vertical ground reaction forces through the knee joint instead of through the ankle joint, as did the Chi runners. This finding is consistent with Arendse et al, 1 who reported reduced KENW and greater APNW in a group of Pose runners who used a forefoot-strike pattern compared to runners who used either a midfoot-strike or RS pattern.…”

Section: Kinematic Variablessupporting

confidence: 91%

A Comparison of Negative Joint Work and Vertical Ground Reaction Force Loading Rates in Chi Runners and Rearfoot-Striking Runners

Goss

Gross

2013

Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Study Design Observational. Objectives To compare lower extremity negative joint work and vertical ground reaction force loading rates in rearfoot-striking (RS) and Chi runners. Background Alternative running styles such as Chi running have become a popular alternative to RS running. Proponents assert that this running style reduces knee joint loading and ground reaction force loading rates. Methods Twenty-two RS and 12 Chi runners ran for 5 minutes at a self-selected speed on an instrumented treadmill. A 3-D motion analysis system was used to obtain kinematic data. Average vertical ground reaction force loading rate and negative work of the ankle dorsiflexors, ankle plantar flexors, and knee extensors were computed during the stance phase. Groups were compared using a 1-way analysis of covariance for each variable, with running speed and age as covariates. Results On average, RS runners demonstrated greater knee extensor negative work (RS, −0.332 J/body height × body weight [BH·BW]; Chi, −0.144 J/BH·BW; P<.001), whereas Chi runners demonstrated more ankle plantar flexor negative work (Chi, −0.467 J/BH·BW; RS, −0.315 J/BH·BW; P<.001). RS runners demonstrated greater average vertical ground reaction force loading rates than Chi runners (RS, 68.6 BW/s; Chi, 43.1 BW/s; P<.001). Conclusion Chi running may reduce vertical loading rates and knee extensor work, but may increase work of the ankle plantar flexors. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2013;43(10):685–692. Epub 9 September 2013. doi:10.2519/jospt.2013.4542

show abstract

Section: Kinematic Variablessupporting

confidence: 91%

A Comparison of Negative Joint Work and Vertical Ground Reaction Force Loading Rates in Chi Runners and Rearfoot-Striking Runners

Goss

Gross

2013

Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is important, as barefoot running as well as adopting a forefoot or midfoot strike pattern has been shown to increase the mechanical demand of the ankle plantar flexors. 2,5,8,19,31,35,46 Furthermore, post hoc analysis revealed that there was no significant difference in ankle plantar flexor moment at the time of peak PFJ stress across the 3 trunk conditions. We propose that adopting a forward-lean trunk posture during running may be a preferable strategy to reduce PFJ stress without increasing the mechanical demand on ankle plantar flexors.…”

Section: Discussion Tmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…Peak PFJ stress was significantly lower in the flexed condition (mean  SD, 20.2  3. at the ankle plantar flexors. 2,5,8,19,31,35,46 Recent studies suggest that sagittal plane trunk posture may be associated with tibiofemoral joint biomechanics during weight-bearing activities. For example, a forward trunk lean posture has been found to be associated with lower knee extensor moments during walking, stair ascent, and single-leg-hop landing.…”

Section: T T Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sagittal Plane Trunk Posture Influences Patellofemoral Joint Stress During Running

Teng¹,

Powers²

2014

Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy

109

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Study Design Cross-sectional, repeated-measures. Objectives To examine the association between sagittal plane trunk posture and patellofemoral joint (PFJ) stress, and to determine whether modifying sagittal plane trunk posture influences PFJ stress during running. Background Patellofemoral pain is the most common injury among runners and is thought to be the result of elevated PFJ stress. While sagittal plane trunk posture has been shown to influence tibiofemoral joint mechanics, no study has examined the influence of trunk posture on PFJ kinetics. Methods Twenty-four asymptomatic recreational runners (12 women, 12 men) ran overground at a speed of 3.4 m/s under 3 trunk-posture conditions: self-selected, flexed, and extended. Trunk and knee kinematics, ground reaction forces, and electromyographic signals from selected lower extremity muscles were obtained. A previously described PFJ biomechanical model was used to quantify PFJ stress. Results The mean ± SD trunk flexion angles under the self-selected, flexed, and extended running conditions were 7.3° ± 3.6°, 14.1° ± 4.8°, and 4.0° ± 3.9°, respectively. A significant inverse relationship was observed between mean trunk flexion angle and peak PFJ stress during the self-selected condition (r = −0.60, P = .002). Peak PFJ stress was significantly lower in the flexed condition (mean ± SD, 20.2 ± 3.4 MPa; P<.001) and significantly higher in the extended condition (23.1 ± 3.4 MPa; P<.001) compared to the self-selected condition (21.5 ± 3.2 MPa). Conclusion Sagittal plane trunk posture has a significant influence on PFJ kinetics during running. Incorporation of a forward trunk lean may be an effective strategy to reduce PFJ stress during running. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2014;44(10):785–792. Epub 25 August 2014. doi:10.2519/jospt.2014.5249

show abstract

“…2,47 The MSA runners, however, used increased ankle excursion and increased APNW to reduce the vertical ground reaction force loading rate. Arendse et al 13 also observed reduced KENW and greater APNW in a group of Pose runners who used a forefoot-strike pattern compared with runners who used either a midfoot or rear-foot-strike pattern.…”

Section: Work Variablesmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…7,8 Several biomechanical researchers [9][10][11][12] have observed that most runners demonstrate a rear-foot-strike pattern. Rearfoot-strike running, with the heel making initial contact with the ground, has been associated with greater knee-joint loading 13 and greater initial vertical-loading rates than running with a more anterior-foot-strike pattern. 9 Running with an increased stride frequency may reduce knee-joint loading.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Lower Extremity Biomechanics and Self-Reported Foot-Strike Patterns Among Runners in Traditional and Minimalist Shoes

Goss¹,

Lewek²,

Yu³

et al. 2015

Journal of Athletic Training

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context:The injury incidence rate among runners is approximately 50%. Some individuals have advocated using an anterior-foot-strike pattern to reduce ground reaction forces and injury rates that they attribute to a rear-foot-strike pattern. The proportion of minimalist shoe wearers who adopt an anterior-foot-strike pattern remains unclear.Objective: To evaluate the accuracy of self-reported footstrike patterns, compare negative ankle-and knee-joint angular work among runners using different foot-strike patterns and wearing traditional or minimalist shoes, and describe average vertical-loading rates.Design: Descriptive laboratory study. Setting: Research laboratory. Patients or Other Participants: A total of 60 healthy volunteers (37 men, 23 women; age ¼ 34.9 6 8.9 years, height ¼ 1.74 6 0.08 m, mass ¼ 70.9 6 13.4 kg) with more than 6 months of experience wearing traditional or minimalist shoes were instructed to classify their foot-strike patterns.Intervention(s): Participants ran in their preferred shoes on an instrumented treadmill with 3-dimensional motion capture.Main Outcome Measure(s): Self-reported foot-strike patterns were compared with 2-dimensional video assessments.Runners were classified into 3 groups based on video assessment: traditional-shoe rear-foot strikers (TSR; n ¼ 22), minimalist-shoe anterior-foot strikers (MSA; n ¼ 21), and minimalist-shoe rear-foot strikers (MSR; n ¼ 17). Ankle and knee negative angular work and average vertical-loading rates during stance phase were compared among groups.Results: Only 41 (68.3%) runners reported foot-strike patterns that agreed with the video assessment (j ¼ 0.42, P , .001). The TSR runners demonstrated greater ankle-dorsiflexion and knee-extension negative work than MSA and MSR runners (P , .05). The MSA (P , .001) and MSR (P ¼ .01) runners demonstrated greater ankle plantar-flexion negative work than TSR runners. The MSR runners demonstrated a greater average vertical-loading rate than MSA and TSR runners (P , .001).Conclusions: Runners often cannot report their foot-strike patterns accurately and may not automatically adopt an anterior-foot-strike pattern after transitioning to minimalist running shoes.Key Words: barefoot running, ground reaction forces, negative work, loading rate Key PointsAccuracy of self-reported foot-strike patterns for runners wearing minimalist running shoes was poor. A cohort of runners who wore minimalist shoes for at least 6 months demonstrated a rear-foot-strike pattern and potentially injurious ground reaction force rates of loading. Runners using a rear-foot-strike pattern and wearing traditional shoes demonstrated more overall knee excursion, greater knee-extension negative work, and greater ankle-dorsiflexion negative work than runners wearing minimalist shoes, regardless of foot-strike pattern.

show abstract

Reduced Eccentric Loading of the Knee with the Pose Running Method

Cited by 79 publications

References 21 publications

A Comparison of Negative Joint Work and Vertical Ground Reaction Force Loading Rates in Chi Runners and Rearfoot-Striking Runners

A Comparison of Negative Joint Work and Vertical Ground Reaction Force Loading Rates in Chi Runners and Rearfoot-Striking Runners

Sagittal Plane Trunk Posture Influences Patellofemoral Joint Stress During Running

Lower Extremity Biomechanics and Self-Reported Foot-Strike Patterns Among Runners in Traditional and Minimalist Shoes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About