In particular, when the foot hits the ground, the magnitude of the vertical ground reaction force impact peak (IP) and loading rate (LR) have been linked to the risk of running injuries 3, 4, so the study of running injury prevention has primarily focused on the management of impact loading. However, each year between 37% and 56% of runners worldwide incur injuries 2 that typically result from repeated loading of the musculoskeletal system. Running, a popular exercise across the world, offers significant cardiovascular and other health benefits 1. These discoveries may explain why shoes with more cushioning do not protect against impact-related running injuries. We attribute the greater impact loading with the maximalist shoes to stiffer leg during landing compared to that of running with the conventional shoes.
This surprising outcome was more pronounced at fast running speed (14.5 km/h), where ground reaction force impact peak and loading rate were 10.7% and 12.3% greater, respectively, in the maximalist shoe compared to the conventional shoe, whereas only a slightly higher impact peak (6.4%) was found at the 10 km/h speed with the maximalist shoe. We found that highly cushioned maximalist shoes alter spring-like running mechanics and amplify rather than attenuate impact loading.
To better understand the shoe cushioning paradox, we examined impact loading and the spring-like mechanics of running in a conventional control running shoe and a highly cushioned maximalist shoe at two training speeds, 10 and 14.5 km/h. However, despite decades of shoe technology developments and the fact that shoes have become increasingly cushioned, aimed to ease the impact on runners’ legs, running injuries have not decreased. Running shoe cushioning has become a standard method for managing impact loading and consequent injuries due to running.
0 kommentar(er)
