PL EN


Preferences help
enabled [disable] Abstract
Number of results
Journal
2014 | 15 | 4 | 209-215
Article title

The Effects of Various Running Inclines on Three-Segment Foot Mechanics and Plantar Fascia Strain

Content
Title variants
Languages of publication
EN
Abstracts
EN
Purpose. There has yet to be a combined analysis of three-dimensional multi-segment foot kinematics and plantar fascia strain in running gait at various degrees of inclination. The aim of the current study was therefore to investigate the above during treadmill running at different inclines (0°, 5°, 10° and 15°). Methods. Twelve male participants ran at 4.0 m · s-1 in the four different inclinations. Three-dimensional kinematics of the foot segments and plantar fascia strain were quantified for each incline and contrasted using one-way repeated measures ANOVA. Results and conclusions. The results showed that plantar fascia strain increased significantly as a function of running incline. Given the projected association between plantar fascia strain and the aetiology of injury, inclined running may be associated with a greater incidence of injury to the plantar fascia.
Keywords
Publisher

Journal
Year
Volume
15
Issue
4
Pages
209-215
Physical description
Dates
published
1 - 12 - 2014
online
27 - 3 - 2015
accepted
28 - 11 - 2014
received
5 - 10 - 2014
Contributors
  • Division of Sport Exercise and Nutritional Sciences, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, United Kingdom, JKSinclair@uclan.ac.uk
  • Division of Sport Exercise and Nutritional Sciences, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, United Kingdom
  • Division of Sport Exercise and Nutritional Sciences, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, United Kingdom
References
  • 1. Hillman C.H., Erickson K.I., Kramer A.F., Be smart, exercise your heart: exercise effects on brain and cognition. Nat Rev Neurosci, 2008, 9 (1), 58-65, doi: 10.1038/nrn2298.[Crossref]
  • 2. van Gent R.N., Siem D., van Middlekoop M., van Os AG., Bierma-Zeinstra S.M.A, Koes B.W., Incidence and determinants of lower extremity running injuries in long distance runners: a systematic review. Br J Sports Med, 2007, 41 (8), 469-480, doi: 10.1136/bjsm.2006.033548.[Crossref][WoS]
  • 3. Taunton J.E., Ryan M.B., Clement D.B., McKenzie D.C., Lloyd-Smith D.R., Zumbo B.D., A retrospective case-control analysis of 2002 running injuries. Br J Sports Med, 2002, 36 (2), 95-101, doi:10.1136/bjsm.36.2.95.[Crossref]
  • 4. Daoud A.I., Geissler G.J., Wang F., Saretsky J., Daoud Y.A., Lieberman, D.E. Foot strike and injury rates in endurance runners: a retrospective study. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 2012, 44 (7), 1325-1334, doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e3182465115.[Crossref][WoS]
  • 5. Zifchock R.A., Davis I., Higginson J., McCaw S., Royer T., Side-to-side differences in overuse running injury susceptibility: a retrospective study. Hum Mov Sci, 2008, 27 (6), 888-902, doi: 10.1016/j.humov.2008.03.007.[WoS][Crossref]
  • 6. Taunton J.E., Ryan M.B., Clement D.B., McKenzie D.C., Lloyd-Smith D.R., Zumbo B.D., A prospective study of running injuries: the Vancouver Sun Run “In Training” clinics. Br J Sports Med, 2003, 37 (3), 239-244, doi: 10.1136/bjsm.37.3.239.[Crossref]
  • 7. Nielsen R.O., Buist I., Parner E.T., Nohr E.A., Sørensen H., Lind M. et al., Predictors of Running-Related Injuries Among 930 Novice Runners A 1-Year Prospective Followup Study. Orthop J Sports Med, 2013, 1 (1), doi: 10.1177/2325967113487316.
  • 8. Sinclair J., Taylor P.J., Hebron J., Chockalingam N., Differences in multi-segment foot kinematics measured using skin and shoe mounted markers. Foot & Ankle Online Journal, 2014, 7 (2), doi: 10.3827/faoj.2014.0702.0007.[Crossref]
  • 9. Eslami M., Begon M., Farahpour N., Allard P., Forefootrearfoot coupling patterns and tibial internal rotation during stance phase of barefoot versus shod running. Clin Biomech, 2007, 22 (1), 74-80, doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech. 2006.08.002.[WoS][Crossref]
  • 10. Lareau C.R., Sawyer G.A., Wang J.H., DiGiovanni C.W., Plantar and Medial Heel Pain: Diagnosis and Management. J Am Acad Orthop Sur, 2014, 22 (6), 372-380, doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-22-06-372.[Crossref]
  • 11. Roberts T.J, Belliveau R.A., Sources of mechanical power for uphill running in humans. J Exp Biol, 2005, 208 (10), 1963-1970, doi: 10.1242/jeb.01555.[Crossref]
  • 12. Telhan G., Franz J.R., Dicharry J., Wilder R.P., Riley P.O., Kerrigan D.C., Lower limb joint kinetics during moderately sloped running. J Ath Train, 2010, 45 (1), 16-21, doi: 10.4085/1062-6050-45.1.16.[Crossref]
  • 13. Swanson S.C., Caldwell G.E. An integrated biomechanical analysis of high speed incline and level treadmill running. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 2000, 32 (6), 1146-1155.[Crossref]
  • 14. Sinclair J., Greenhalgh A., Taylor P.J., Bentley I., Varying degrees of running incline: Implications for chronic injury aetiology and rehabilitation. Comp Exerc Phys, 2014, 10 (4), 207-214, doi: 10.3920/CEP140016.[Crossref]
  • 15. Padulo J., Powell D., Milia R., Ardigò L.P., A Paradigm of Uphill Running. PloS One, 2013, 8 (7), 1-8, doi:10.1371/ journal.pone.0069006.[Crossref][WoS]
  • 16. Cappozzo A., Catani F., Della Croce U., Leardini A., Position and orientation in space of bones during movement: anatomical frame definition and determination. Clin Biomech, 1995, 10 (4), 171-178, doi: 10.1016/0268-0033(95)91394-T.[Crossref]
  • 17. Leardini A., Benedetti M.G., Berti L., Bettinelli D., Nativo R., Giannini S., Rear-foot, mid-foot and fore-foot motion during the stance phase of gait. Gait Posture, 2007, 25 (3), 453-462, doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2006.05.017.[Crossref]
  • 18. Tome J., Nawoczenski D.A., Flemister A., Houck J., Comparison of foot kinematics between subjectss with posterior tibialis tendon dysfunction and healthy controls. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther, 2006, 36 (9), 635-644, doi: 10.2519/jospt.2006.229.[Crossref][WoS]
  • 19. Sinclair J., Taylor P.J., Hobbs S.J., Alpha level adjustments for multiple dependent variable analyses and their applicability - A review. Int J Sport Sci Eng, 2013, 7 (2), 17-20.
  • 20. Sinclair J., Greenhalgh A., Brooks D., Edmundson C.J., Hobbs S.J., The influence of barefoot and barefoot-inspired footwear on the kinetics and kinematics of running in comparison to conventional running shoes. Footwear Science, 2013, 5 (1), 45-53, doi: 10.1080/19424280. 2012.693543.[Crossref]
  • 21. Lieberman D.E., Venkadesan M., Werbel W.A., Daoud A.I., D’Andrea S., Davis I.S. et al., Foot strike patterns and collision forces in habitually barefoot versus shod runners. Nature, 2010, 463 (7280), 531-535, doi: 10.1038/nature08723.[WoS][Crossref]
  • 22. Pohl M.B., Messenger N., Buckley J.G., Forefoot, rearfoot and shank coupling: effect of variations in speed and mode of gait. Gait Posture, 2007, 25 (2), 295-302, doi: 10.1016/ j.gaitpost.2006.04.012.[WoS][Crossref]
  • 23. Sinclair J., Richards J., Taylor P.J., Edmundson C.J., Brooks D., Hobbs S.J., Three-dimensional kinematic comparison of treadmill and overground running. Sports Biomech, 2013, 12 (3), 272-282, doi: 10.1080/14763141. 2012. 759614.[WoS][Crossref]
  • 24. Sinclair J., Greenhalgh A., Taylor P.J., Edmundson C.J., Brooks D., Hobbs S.J., Differences in Tibiocalcaneal Kinematics Measured with Skin-and Shoe-Mounted Markers. Hum Mov, 2013, 14 (1), 64-69, doi: 10.2478/humo-2013-0005. [Crossref]
Document Type
Publication order reference
Identifiers
YADDA identifier
bwmeta1.element.-psjd-doi-10_1515_humo-2015-0013
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.