» Articles » PMID: 22089481

Ground Contact Time As an Indicator of Metabolic Cost in Elite Distance Runners

Overview
Specialty Orthopedics
Date 2011 Nov 18
PMID 22089481
Citations 17
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Unlabelled: Differences in running economy at common speeds have been demonstrated between male and female distance runners, as well as between middle-distance (MD) and long-distance (LD) specialists. Whether measures of foot ground contact time (tc), known to be proportional to the mass-specific cost of locomotion, follows the same running economy relationships in these groups is unknown.

Purpose: This study examined if differences in tc and selected gait kinematic variables exist between elite male and female distance runners, as well as between elite MD and LD specialists, as running speed increases.

Methods: Twelve male and six female elite distance runners completed multiple 30-s trials on a treadmill at common competitive racing velocities. Wireless triaxial 10-g accelerometers, sampling at 1024 Hz, were securely attached to the laces of each shoe. Values of tc, swing time, stride length, and stride frequency were determined from accelerometric output corresponding to foot strike and toe-off events obtained from a minimum of 20 consecutive steps of each foot. A proportional estimate of metabolic cost was obtained by using 1/tc.

Results: Women displayed shorter tc, swing time, and stride length with greater stride frequency compared with men at common speeds; however, these differences were largely negated by normalizing to standing height. At common speeds, women demonstrated smaller measures of tc compared with men, suggesting an increased metabolic cost, paralleling published oxygen uptake data. MD specialists displayed smaller increases in 1/tc as speed increased, compared with LD specialists.

Conclusions: Elite distance runners demonstrate ground contact measures that suggest that known differences in running economy between sexes and event specialties may be a result of differences in running gait.

Citing Articles

Using Wearable Sensor Technology to Analyze Running Technique and Prospective Running-Related Injuries During United States Military Cadet Basic Training.

Weart A, Brown L, Florkiewicz E, Freisinger G, East K, Reilly N Orthop J Sports Med. 2025; 13(2):23259671241309273.

PMID: 39944772 PMC: 11815808. DOI: 10.1177/23259671241309273.


Effect of cross-slope angle on running economy and gait characteristics at moderate running velocity.

Elmer D, Asbill H Eur J Appl Physiol. 2023; 124(4):1259-1266.

PMID: 37993733 DOI: 10.1007/s00421-023-05358-2.


The Validity of a Three-Dimensional Motion Capture System and the Garmin Running Dynamics Pod in Connection with an Assessment of Ground Contact Time While Running in Place.

Drobnic M, Verdel N, Holmberg H, Supej M Sensors (Basel). 2023; 23(16).

PMID: 37631692 PMC: 10459607. DOI: 10.3390/s23167155.


Use of smart patches by athletes: A concise SWOT analysis.

Verdel N, Hjort K, Sperlich B, Holmberg H, Supej M Front Physiol. 2023; 14:1055173.

PMID: 37035682 PMC: 10073734. DOI: 10.3389/fphys.2023.1055173.


Running Speed Estimation Using Shoe-Worn Inertial Sensors: Direct Integration, Linear, and Personalized Model.

Falbriard M, Soltani A, Aminian K Front Sports Act Living. 2021; 3:585809.

PMID: 33817632 PMC: 8014039. DOI: 10.3389/fspor.2021.585809.