| Title |
The Effect of Foot Strike Pattern on Achilles Tendon Load During Running
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Biomedical Engineering, May 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10439-013-0819-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Thomas Almonroeder, John D. Willson, Thomas W. Kernozek |
| Abstract |
In this study we compared Achilles tendon loading parameters during barefoot running among females with different foot strike patterns using open-source computer muscle modeling software to provide dynamic simulations of running. Muscle forces of the gastrocnemius and soleus were estimated from experimental data collected in a motion capture laboratory during barefoot running for 11 runners utilizing a rearfoot strike (RFS) and 8 runners utilizing a non-RFS (NRFS) pattern. Our results show that peak Achilles tendon force occurred earlier in stance phase (p = 0.007), which contributed to a 15% increase in average Achilles tendon loading rate among participants adopting a NRFS pattern (p = 0.06). Stance time, step length, and the estimated number of steps per mile were similar between groups. However, runners with a NRFS pattern experienced 11% greater Achilles tendon impulse each step (p = 0.05) and nearly significantly greater Achilles tendon impulse per mile run (p = 0.06). This difference equates to an additional 47.7 body weights for each mile run with a NRFS pattern. Runners considering a NRFS pattern may want to account for these novel stressors and adapt training programs accordingly. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 37 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 7 | 19% |
| United Kingdom | 5 | 14% |
| Australia | 5 | 14% |
| Spain | 4 | 11% |
| Netherlands | 2 | 5% |
| Montenegro | 1 | 3% |
| Sweden | 1 | 3% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 3% |
| Ireland | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 8 | 22% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 26 | 70% |
| Scientists | 9 | 24% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 323 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 313 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 71 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 42 | 13% |
| Researcher | 38 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 32 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 18 | 6% |
| Other | 61 | 19% |
| Unknown | 61 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 100 | 31% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 44 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 35 | 11% |
| Engineering | 24 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 14 | 4% |
| Other | 22 | 7% |
| Unknown | 84 | 26% |