Initial foot contact and related kinematics affect impact loading rate in running

Bastiaan Breine, Philippe Malcolm, Ine Van Caekenberghe, Pieter Fiers, Edward C. Frederick, Dirk De Clercq

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This study assessed kinematic differences between different foot strike patterns and their relationship with peak vertical instantaneous loading rate (VILR) of the ground reaction force (GRF). Fifty-two runners ran at 3.2 m · s−1 while we recorded GRF and lower limb kinematics and determined foot strike pattern: Typical or Atypical rearfoot strike (RFS), midfoot strike (MFS) of forefoot strike (FFS). Typical RFS had longer contact times and a lower leg stiffness than Atypical RFS and MFS. Typical RFS showed a dorsiflexed ankle (7.2 ± 3.5°) and positive foot angle (20.4 ± 4.8°) at initial contact while MFS showed a plantar flexed ankle (−10.4 ± 6.3°) and more horizontal foot (1.6 ± 3.1°). Atypical RFS showed a plantar flexed ankle (−3.1 ± 4.4°) and a small foot angle (7.0 ± 5.1°) at initial contact and had the highest VILR. For the RFS (Typical and Atypical RFS), foot angle at initial contact showed the highest correlation with VILR (r = −0.68). The observed higher VILR in Atypical RFS could be related to both ankle and foot kinematics and global running style that indicate a limited use of known kinematic impact absorbing “strategies” such as initial ankle dorsiflexion in MFS or initial ankle plantar flexion in Typical RFS.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1556-1564
Number of pages9
JournalJournal of Sports Sciences
Volume35
Issue number15
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 3 2017

Fingerprint

Biomechanical Phenomena
Foot
Ankle
Lower Extremity
Leg

Keywords

  • Foot strike pattern
  • loading rate
  • midfoot strike
  • rearfoot strike
  • running style

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
  • Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation

Cite this

Breine, B., Malcolm, P., Van Caekenberghe, I., Fiers, P., Frederick, E. C., & De Clercq, D. (2017). Initial foot contact and related kinematics affect impact loading rate in running. Journal of Sports Sciences, 35(15), 1556-1564. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2016.1225970

Initial foot contact and related kinematics affect impact loading rate in running. / Breine, Bastiaan; Malcolm, Philippe; Van Caekenberghe, Ine; Fiers, Pieter; Frederick, Edward C.; De Clercq, Dirk.

In: Journal of Sports Sciences, Vol. 35, No. 15, 03.08.2017, p. 1556-1564.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Breine, B, Malcolm, P, Van Caekenberghe, I, Fiers, P, Frederick, EC & De Clercq, D 2017, 'Initial foot contact and related kinematics affect impact loading rate in running', Journal of Sports Sciences, vol. 35, no. 15, pp. 1556-1564. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2016.1225970
Breine, Bastiaan ; Malcolm, Philippe ; Van Caekenberghe, Ine ; Fiers, Pieter ; Frederick, Edward C. ; De Clercq, Dirk. / Initial foot contact and related kinematics affect impact loading rate in running. In: Journal of Sports Sciences. 2017 ; Vol. 35, No. 15. pp. 1556-1564.
@article{19000664ab8f4509b0630108ed8e6e5f,
title = "Initial foot contact and related kinematics affect impact loading rate in running",
abstract = "This study assessed kinematic differences between different foot strike patterns and their relationship with peak vertical instantaneous loading rate (VILR) of the ground reaction force (GRF). Fifty-two runners ran at 3.2 m · s−1 while we recorded GRF and lower limb kinematics and determined foot strike pattern: Typical or Atypical rearfoot strike (RFS), midfoot strike (MFS) of forefoot strike (FFS). Typical RFS had longer contact times and a lower leg stiffness than Atypical RFS and MFS. Typical RFS showed a dorsiflexed ankle (7.2 ± 3.5°) and positive foot angle (20.4 ± 4.8°) at initial contact while MFS showed a plantar flexed ankle (−10.4 ± 6.3°) and more horizontal foot (1.6 ± 3.1°). Atypical RFS showed a plantar flexed ankle (−3.1 ± 4.4°) and a small foot angle (7.0 ± 5.1°) at initial contact and had the highest VILR. For the RFS (Typical and Atypical RFS), foot angle at initial contact showed the highest correlation with VILR (r = −0.68). The observed higher VILR in Atypical RFS could be related to both ankle and foot kinematics and global running style that indicate a limited use of known kinematic impact absorbing “strategies” such as initial ankle dorsiflexion in MFS or initial ankle plantar flexion in Typical RFS.",
keywords = "Foot strike pattern, loading rate, midfoot strike, rearfoot strike, running style",
author = "Bastiaan Breine and Philippe Malcolm and {Van Caekenberghe}, Ine and Pieter Fiers and Frederick, {Edward C.} and {De Clercq}, Dirk",
year = "2017",
month = "8",
day = "3",
doi = "10.1080/02640414.2016.1225970",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "35",
pages = "1556--1564",
journal = "Journal of Sports Sciences",
issn = "0264-0414",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "15",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Initial foot contact and related kinematics affect impact loading rate in running

AU - Breine, Bastiaan

AU - Malcolm, Philippe

AU - Van Caekenberghe, Ine

AU - Fiers, Pieter

AU - Frederick, Edward C.

AU - De Clercq, Dirk

PY - 2017/8/3

Y1 - 2017/8/3

N2 - This study assessed kinematic differences between different foot strike patterns and their relationship with peak vertical instantaneous loading rate (VILR) of the ground reaction force (GRF). Fifty-two runners ran at 3.2 m · s−1 while we recorded GRF and lower limb kinematics and determined foot strike pattern: Typical or Atypical rearfoot strike (RFS), midfoot strike (MFS) of forefoot strike (FFS). Typical RFS had longer contact times and a lower leg stiffness than Atypical RFS and MFS. Typical RFS showed a dorsiflexed ankle (7.2 ± 3.5°) and positive foot angle (20.4 ± 4.8°) at initial contact while MFS showed a plantar flexed ankle (−10.4 ± 6.3°) and more horizontal foot (1.6 ± 3.1°). Atypical RFS showed a plantar flexed ankle (−3.1 ± 4.4°) and a small foot angle (7.0 ± 5.1°) at initial contact and had the highest VILR. For the RFS (Typical and Atypical RFS), foot angle at initial contact showed the highest correlation with VILR (r = −0.68). The observed higher VILR in Atypical RFS could be related to both ankle and foot kinematics and global running style that indicate a limited use of known kinematic impact absorbing “strategies” such as initial ankle dorsiflexion in MFS or initial ankle plantar flexion in Typical RFS.

AB - This study assessed kinematic differences between different foot strike patterns and their relationship with peak vertical instantaneous loading rate (VILR) of the ground reaction force (GRF). Fifty-two runners ran at 3.2 m · s−1 while we recorded GRF and lower limb kinematics and determined foot strike pattern: Typical or Atypical rearfoot strike (RFS), midfoot strike (MFS) of forefoot strike (FFS). Typical RFS had longer contact times and a lower leg stiffness than Atypical RFS and MFS. Typical RFS showed a dorsiflexed ankle (7.2 ± 3.5°) and positive foot angle (20.4 ± 4.8°) at initial contact while MFS showed a plantar flexed ankle (−10.4 ± 6.3°) and more horizontal foot (1.6 ± 3.1°). Atypical RFS showed a plantar flexed ankle (−3.1 ± 4.4°) and a small foot angle (7.0 ± 5.1°) at initial contact and had the highest VILR. For the RFS (Typical and Atypical RFS), foot angle at initial contact showed the highest correlation with VILR (r = −0.68). The observed higher VILR in Atypical RFS could be related to both ankle and foot kinematics and global running style that indicate a limited use of known kinematic impact absorbing “strategies” such as initial ankle dorsiflexion in MFS or initial ankle plantar flexion in Typical RFS.

KW - Foot strike pattern

KW - loading rate

KW - midfoot strike

KW - rearfoot strike

KW - running style

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84987630646&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84987630646&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/02640414.2016.1225970

DO - 10.1080/02640414.2016.1225970

M3 - Article

VL - 35

SP - 1556

EP - 1564

JO - Journal of Sports Sciences

JF - Journal of Sports Sciences

SN - 0264-0414

IS - 15

ER -