Barefoot running efficiency

Not sure that it is all about efficiency....what about injury prevention ..... but you might be interested in this from here.

UPDATE- Someone pointed me to the comments to the Scientific American article and this one from Ken Schafer makes some excellent points, so I hope he doesn't mind me cutting and pasting:

..............I have read the study. This study had nothing to do with cushioned shoes. They took experienced barefoot runners. And compared how much energy they used running barefoot and how much energy they used running in very light weight minimalist running shoes (little to no cushion).

The subjects used slightly more energy when running barefoot. It is important to understand that the subjects maintained the same "barefoot" running technique with and without shoes. So this was not a test of fore-footed running technique vs. heel striking running technique. Most of the evidence to date indicates that the technique used by barefoot runners is more efficient than the heel landing technique that most people (from sedentary shoe wearing populations) use when running.

Second point, barefoot runners have NOT dominated distance running for decades. The person, who wrote this, in the caption above, has no idea what he is talking about. The African runners, who many times have grown up barefoot, and who often run using a fore-footed landing, have dominated distance running for decades, but mostly while wearing shoes. Finally, this was just one study. So it is the results are far from conclusive.

stop old people from falling.....go barefoot?

My work is too busy at the moment for me to do much on this blog, but I am still keeping an eye on news and research.

This study popped up last week and I thought it had some interesting implications.

Altering gait by way of stimulation of the plantar surface of the foot: the immediate effect of wearing textured insoles in older fallers

Conclusions - Stimulating the plantar surface of the foot by way of wearing this type of textured insole causes an immediate effect - in this case a slower, more cautious gait in older fallers. Further work is required to determine how textured insoles can be used to improve gait in older fallers.

The whole study is there for you to look through.

Anyway, what this made me think of was the value of being barefoot.  So much information comes from the feet, from the sole.  While shod, all that information is blunted.  Barefoot there is so much more stimulation and data that can be processed by the brain to feed into the proprioceptive system.

Textured insoles are just a "stepping stone" to being barefoot.  If they can help to prevent falls, maybe being barefoot....on rough rich surfaces...could do even more

Lieberman on Obesity

Running Barefoot - Sh*t Runners Say To Barefoot Runners

This is fantastic from Steven Sashen

A bit more barefooting

Marc from Feel Good Eating pointed me towards this one from yesterday's NY Times:

Does Foot Form Explain Running Injuries?

But, says Mr. Daoud, who was himself an oft-injured heel-striker during his cross-country racing days, "if you have experienced injury after injury and you're a heel-striker, it might be worth considering a change." (If you're unsure of your strike pattern, have a friend videotape you from the side as you run, he suggests, then use slow motion to watch how your foot hits the ground.)

If you do decide to reshape your stride, proceed slowly, he cautions. Many people who abruptly switch to barefoot running or a forefoot running form get hurt in the process, he says. The body's tissues adapt to the forces generated by long-term heel striking. Change your form, and the forces will affect different parts of the leg, leading to soreness and, potentially, injury.

Try landing on the ball of your foot "for five minutes at first at the end of a run," Mr. Daoud suggests. Work up to longer periods of forefoot landings as your body adjusts and only if you do not notice significant, continuing soreness.

In his own case, Mr. Daoud now runs consistently with a forefoot landing style, but the transition was not seamless. "I broke a metatarsal while running my first marathon after transitioning a bit too quickly and expecting a bit too much from my body too soon," he says. So fair warning to those considering making the transition to forefoot landings: "Give your body time!"

I think I had mentioned this research before but it is good to see it getting broader readership

Stability and Mobility for natural running

Excellent stuff from the Natural Running Centre

Lots of good stuff here on posture, gait, mobility and stability



thanks to Jim Hansen for pointing this out

More Barefoot Research....

Thanks to Adam Dean for pointing this out.

Almost a year ago I had a couple of posts (here and here) about a Harvard Professor who was doing research into barefoot running.  The research continues, and Wired Magazine had a feature on his two latest studies which have been published just this month.  Their piece is called More Evidence Supports Barefoot Running and points to Daniel Lieberman's latest work:

If you’re a runner, start striking with your forefoot. And wear those goofy minimalist shoes while you’re at it. Your body will thank you.

Those are the findings of a pair of studies by Daniel Lieberman, a professor of human evolutionary biology at Harvard University. He found runners who use a forefoot strike face a significantly lower risk of repetitive stress injuries, and barely there running shoes produce more efficient movement than conventional kicks.

The two studies are:



Foot Strike and Injury Rates in Endurance Runners: a retrospective study.

PURPOSE:
This retrospective study tests if runners who habitually forefoot strike have different rates of injury than runners who habitually rearfoot strike.
METHODS:
We measured the strike characteristics of middle and long distance runners from a collegiate cross country team and quantified their history of injury, including the incidence and rate of specific injuries, the severity of each injury, and the rate of mild, moderate and severe injuries per mile run.
RESULTS:
Of the 52 runners studied, 36 (59%) primarily used a rearfoot strike and 16 (31%) primarily used a forefoot strike. Approximately 74% of runners experienced a moderate or severe injury each year, but those who habitually rearfoot strike had approximately twice the rate of repetitive stress injuries than individuals who habitually forefoot strike. Traumatic injury rates were not significantly different between the two groups. A generalized linear model showed that strike type, sex, race distance, and average miles per week each correlate significantly (p<0.01) with repetitive injury rates.
CONCLUSIONS:
Competitive cross country runners on a college team incur high injury rates, but runners who habitually rearfoot strike have significantly higher rates of repetitive stress injury than those who mostly forefoot strike. This study does not test the causal bases for this general difference. One hypothesis, which requires further research, is that the absence of a marked impact peak in the ground reaction force during a forefoot strike compared to a rearfoot strike may contribute to lower rates of injuries in habitual forefoot strikers.

(interesting that cross country running seems risky whatever you do!)


Effects of Footwear and Strike Type on Running Economy.

PURPOSE:
This study tests if running economy differs in minimal shoes versus standard running shoes with cushioned, elevated heels and arch supports, and in forefoot versus rearfoot strike gaits.
METHODS:
We measured the cost of transport (mlO2/kg/m) in subjects who habitually run in minimal shoes or barefoot while they were running at 3.0 m/s on a treadmill during forefoot and rearfoot striking while wearing minimal and standard shoes, controlling for shoe mass and stride frequency. Force and kinematic data were collected when shod and barefoot to quantify differences in knee flexion, arch strain, plantarflexor force production, and Achilles tendon-triceps surae strain.
RESULTS:
After controlling for stride frequency and shoe mass, runners were 2.41% more economical in the minimal shoe condition when forefoot striking and 3.32% more economical in the minimal shoe condition when rearfoot striking (p<0.05). In contrast, forefoot and rearfoot striking did not differ significantly in cost for either minimal or standard shoe running. Arch strain was not measured in shoes condition but was significantly greater during forefoot than rearfoot striking when barefoot. Plantarflexor force output was significantly higher in forefoot than rearfoot striking, and in barefoot than shod running. Achilles tendon-triceps surae strain and knee flexion were also lower in barefoot than standard shoe running.
CONCLUSIONS:
Minimally shod runners are modestly but significantly more economical than traditionally shod runners regardless of strike type, after controlling for shoe mass and stride frequency. The likely cause of this difference is more elastic energy storage and release in the lower extremity during minimal shoe running.

Sort out your flat feet

I thought this was interesting: First Step Toward Treatment for Painful Flat Feet


It reports on a study which looks how flat feet in an adult occur:

Adult-acquired flat foot is most common in women over 40 and often goes undiagnosed. The condition results from the gradual 'stretching out' over time of a tendon near the ankle bone -- the tibialis posterior tendon -- which is the main stabiliser of the foot arch.

The researchers looked at the very structure of this tendon:

Working with surgeons and scientists at Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge and the University of Bristol, the team showed that the structure and composition of tendon specimens had changed and found evidence of increased activity of some proteolytic enzymes. These enzymes can break down the constituents of the tibialis posterior tendon and weaken it -- causing the foot arch to fall.

The study itself is available here.  

What I found interesting though was the way the report skims over something important - the environmental factors......like footwear.  It mentions high heels as a risk, but I wonder if shoes in general also have an impact.  We dive into research into the structure of tendons that collapse.  Perhaps we just need more people barefoot or in simpler shoes. 

Running Gait and injury

Here is a study which looked at treating a common running injury - Chronic exertional compartment syndrome (CECS) - by getting runners to modify their running technique, moving to a forefoot strike.   Although there were only 2 in the study it seemed to fix the injury.  The entire paper is here.

Here is the abstract for you.

EFFECTS OF FOREFOOT RUNNING ON CHRONIC EXERTIONAL COMPARTMENT SYNDROME: A CASE SERIES.

INTRODUCTION:
Chronic exertional compartment syndrome (CECS) is a condition that occurs almost exclusively with running whereby exercise increases intramuscular pressure compromising circulation, prohibiting muscular function, and causing pain in the lower leg. Currently, a lack of evidence exists for the effective conservative management of CECS. Altering running mechanics by adopting forefoot running as opposed to heel striking may assist in the treatment of CECS, specifically with anterior compartment symptoms.
CASE DESCRIPTION:
The purpose of this case series is to describe the outcomes for subjects with CECS through a systematic conservative treatment model focused on forefoot running. Subject one was a 21 y/o female with a 4 year history of CECS and subject two was a 21 y/o male, 7 months status-post two-compartment right leg fasciotomy with a return of symptoms and a new onset of symptoms on the contralateral side.
OUTCOME:
Both subjects modified their running technique over a period of six weeks. Kinematic and kinetic analysis revealed increased step rate while step length, impulse, and peak vertical ground reaction forces decreased. In addition, leg intracompartmental pressures decreased from pre-training to post-training. Within 6 weeks of intervention subjects increased their running distance and speed absent of symptoms of CECS. Follow-up questionnaires were completed by the subjects at 7 months following intervention; subject one reported running distances up to 12.87 km pain-free and subject two reported running 6.44 km pain-free consistently 3 times a week.
DISCUSSION:
This case series describes a potentially beneficial conservative management approach to CECS in the form of forefoot running instruction. Further research in this area is warranted to further explore the benefits of adopting a forefoot running technique for CECS as well as other musculoskeletal overuse complaints.