» Articles » PMID: 32444149

Transition to Forefoot Strike Reduces Load Rates More Effectively Than Altered Cadence

Overview
Date 2020 May 24
PMID 32444149
Citations 13
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Excessive vertical impacts at landing are associated with common running injuries. Two primary gait-retraining interventions aimed at reducing impact forces are transition to forefoot strike and increasing cadence. The objective of this study was to compare the short- and long-term effects of 2 gait-retraining interventions aimed at reducing landing impacts.

Methods: A total of 39 healthy recreational runners using a rearfoot strike and a cadence of ≤170 steps/min were randomized into cadence (CAD) or forefoot strike (FFS) groups. All participants performed 4 weeks of strengthening followed by 8 sessions of gait-retraining using auditory feedback. Vertical average load rates (VALR) and vertical instantaneous load rates (VILR) were calculated from the vertical ground reaction force curve. Both cadence and foot strike angle were measured using 3D motion analysis and an instrumented treadmill at baseline and at 1 week, 1 month, and 6 months post retraining.

Results: ANOVA revealed that the FFS group had significant reductions in VALR (49.7%) and VILR (41.7%), and changes were maintained long term. Foot strike angle in the FFS group changed from 14.2° dorsiflexion at baseline to 3.4° plantarflexion, with changes maintained long term. The CAD group exhibited significant reduction only in VALR (16%) and only at 6 months. Both groups had significant and similar increases in cadence at all follow-ups (CAD, +7.2% to 173 steps/min; and FFS, +6.1% to 172 steps/min).

Conclusion: Forefoot strike gait-retraining resulted in significantly greater reductions in VALR and similar increases in cadence compared to cadence gait-retraining in the short and long term. Cadence gait-retraining resulted in small reductions in VALR at only the 6-month follow-up.

Citing Articles

Classifying Impact Loading Using Axial Peak Tibial Acceleration and Impact-Related Biomechanical Differences During Treadmill Running.

Doyle E, Doyle T, Bonacci J, Wills J, Campbell R, Fuller J Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2025; 35(1):e70002.

PMID: 39791324 PMC: 11718592. DOI: 10.1111/sms.70002.


Sex- and age-related differences in kinetics and tibial accelerations during military-relevant movement tasks in U.S. Army trainees.

Johnson C, Sara L, Bradach M, Zeppetelli D, Daehlin T, Mullineaux D Eur J Sport Sci. 2024; 24(6):740-749.

PMID: 38874992 PMC: 11235782. DOI: 10.1002/ejsc.12091.


Foot and Ankle Muscle Isometric Strength in Nonrearfoot Compared With Rearfoot Endurance Runners.

Abran G, Schwartz C, Delvaux F, Aguilaniu A, Bornheim S, Croisier J Foot Ankle Orthop. 2023; 8(4):24730114231205305.

PMID: 37886623 PMC: 10599118. DOI: 10.1177/24730114231205305.


The effectiveness of telehealth gait retraining in addition to standard physical therapy treatment for overuse knee injuries in soldiers: a protocol for a randomized clinical trial.

Crowell M, Brindle R, Miller E, Reilly N, Ford K, Goss D Trials. 2023; 24(1):672.

PMID: 37845752 PMC: 10580615. DOI: 10.1186/s13063-023-07502-x.


[The influence of footwear on the human gait].

Zech A Orthopadie (Heidelb). 2023; 52(8):626-630.

PMID: 37369874 DOI: 10.1007/s00132-023-04407-0.


References
1.
Sigrist R, Rauter G, Riener R, Wolf P . Augmented visual, auditory, haptic, and multimodal feedback in motor learning: a review. Psychon Bull Rev. 2012; 20(1):21-53. DOI: 10.3758/s13423-012-0333-8. View

2.
Ryan M, Elashi M, Newsham-West R, Taunton J . Examining injury risk and pain perception in runners using minimalist footwear. Br J Sports Med. 2013; 48(16):1257-62. DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2012-092061. View

3.
Baltich J, Maurer C, Nigg B . Increased vertical impact forces and altered running mechanics with softer midsole shoes. PLoS One. 2015; 10(4):e0125196. PMC: 4405580. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0125196. View

4.
Bonacci J, Saunders P, Hicks A, Rantalainen T, Vicenzino B, Spratford W . Running in a minimalist and lightweight shoe is not the same as running barefoot: a biomechanical study. Br J Sports Med. 2013; 47(6):387-92. DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2012-091837. View

5.
Shih Y, Lin K, Shiang T . Is the foot striking pattern more important than barefoot or shod conditions in running?. Gait Posture. 2013; 38(3):490-4. DOI: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2013.01.030. View