Recent studies have suggested that 95% of modern runners land with a rearfoot strike (RFS) pattern. However, we hypothesize that running with an RFS pattern is indicative of an evolutionary mismatch that can lead to musculoskeletal injury. This perspective is predicated on the notion that our ancestors evolved to run barefoot and primarily with a forefoot strike (FFS) pattern. We contend that structures of the foot and ankle are optimized for forefoot striking which likely led to this pattern in our barefoot state. We propose that the evolutionary mismatch today has been driven by modern footwear that has altered our footstrike pattern. In this paper, we review the differences in foot and ankle function during both a RFS and FFS running pattern. This is followed by a discussion of the interaction of footstrike and footwear on running mechanics. We present evidence supporting the benefits of forefoot striking with respect to common running injuries such as anterior compartment syndrome and patellofemoral pain syndrome. We review the importance of a gradual shift to FFS running to reduce transition-related injuries. In sum, we will make an evidence-based argument for the use of minimal footwear with a FFS pattern to optimize foot strength and function, minimize ground reaction force impacts and reduce injury risk.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9160598 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2022.794005 | DOI Listing |
Gait Posture
March 2024
Spaulding National Running Center, Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA; Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Harvard Medical School, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA; United States Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine, Natick, MA 01760, USA.
Background: A common gait retraining goal for runners is reducing vertical ground reaction force (GRF) loading rates (LRs), which have been associated with injury. Many gait retraining programs prioritize an internal focus of attention, despite evidence supporting an external focus of attention when a specific outcome is desired (e.g.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFProsthet Orthot Int
October 2024
Advanced Manufacturing and Mechatronics Lab, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Malaviya National Institute of Technology, Jaipur, India.
Background: The Jaipur foot is the gold standard in low-cost prosthetics, and the amputee population in low-income and middle-income countries has benefited immensely from this innovation. The ability of the Jaipur foot to mimic the behavior of a regular foot, albeit to a limited extent, has made it a popular choice among clinicians and patients. However, the immense popularity has also hindered further research because minimal efforts have been made to investigate the scope of improvement of the Jaipur foot, particularly with new materials.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJ Foot Ankle Res
March 2023
Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Guangzhou, China.
Background: Falls are commonplace among elderly people. It is urgent to prevent falls. Previous studies have confirmed that there is a difference in plantar pressure between falls and non-falls in elderly people, but the relationship between fall risk and foot pressure has not been studied.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFFront Sports Act Living
January 2023
Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval, Quebec, QC, Canada.
Gait modifications are commonly advocated to decrease knee forces and pain in runners with patellofemoral pain (PFP). However, it remains unknown if clinicians can expect immediate effects on symptoms. Our objectives were (1) to compare the immediate effects of gait modifications on pain and kinetics of runners with PFP; (2) to compare kinetic changes in responders and non-responders; and (3) to compare the effects between rearfoot strikers (RFS) and non-RFS.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFFront Sports Act Living
May 2022
Faculty of Sport and Health Sciences, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Recent studies have suggested that 95% of modern runners land with a rearfoot strike (RFS) pattern. However, we hypothesize that running with an RFS pattern is indicative of an evolutionary mismatch that can lead to musculoskeletal injury. This perspective is predicated on the notion that our ancestors evolved to run barefoot and primarily with a forefoot strike (FFS) pattern.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!