4.4 Article

Acute fatigue negatively affects risk factors for injury in trained but not well-trained habitually shod runners when running barefoot

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SPORT SCIENCE
Volume 17, Issue 9, Pages 1220-1229

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/17461391.2017.1358767

Keywords

Biomechanics; exercise; injury and prevention

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction: Many factors may contribute to running-related injury. These include fatigue and footwear, the combination of which has rarely been studied, in particular with reference to barefoot running, recently advocated as a method to reduce injury risk. Methods: Twenty-two runners (12 well-trained and 10 trained) participated in a 10km fatiguing trial. Knee and ankle joint kinematics and kinetics and electromyography were assessed during overground running in the barefoot and shod condition. This was performed pre- and post-fatigue using a motion capture system and force platforms. Results: Initial loading rate increased in the trained runners when barefoot but not shod. Shod knee stiffness increased in both groups after fatigue, whereas barefoot knee stiffness decreased only in the trained group. A reduction in barefoot bicep femoris pre-activation was found in both groups. During stance, a reduction in vastus lateralis and biceps femoris and an increase in tibialis anterior activity were found over time in both groups and conditions. Trained runners decreased gluteus medius and increased lateral gastrocnemius median frequency for both conditions after fatigue. Conclusion: When fatigued, gait adjustments in habitually shod runners may increase injury risk when running barefoot. Training status may be a risk factor for injury, as less-trained runners experience muscular fatigue changes that may compromise ground reaction force attenuation. Caution is recommended when transitioning to pure barefoot running.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available