Background The relationships between time-dependent impact loading patterns and running-related stress fractures remains unclear, but our recent clinical findings suggest that controlling very early impact dampening after foot strike could lessen injury risk. Objectives To determine: 1) Differences in time-dependent impact loading patterns among runners with history of leg/foot stress fractures compared to non-injured runners, and 2) Whether a gait modification intervention attenuates early impact loading. Design Mixed method design, cross-sectional and intervention. Participants Male and female runners (n=300; 35±15yr, 22.5±3.3 kg/m2, 50.7% female) stratified into groups by stress fracture history: non-injured and history of leg and foot stress fracture (SFx) and an intervention group of healthy runners (n=8). Intervention Gait modification: 1-hr gait analysis session with video biofeedback of running form, and verbal cueing focused on optimizing leg/core muscle preactivation at foot strike. Main Outcome Measurements Time-dependent net ground reaction forces (GRF); medial-lateral GRF patterns during stance. Intervention outcomes included positive/negative loading oscillations, average impact loading rate. Results Cross sectional: SFx demonstrated greater net GRF during first 8% of stance phase on both limbs (p<.05), and greater medal-lateral GRF during the first 7–16% of stance phase (p<.05) than non-injured runners, suggesting the very early stance is an opportune time window to modify biomechanics. Intervention: Gait modification reduced early unloading after foot strike before full body load (up to the first 12% of stance; p<.05), dampened mechanical oscillation frequency, and reduced load rates by an average of 35.3 BW/s. Interlimb asymmetries in impact load rate were reduced by 7.9% from pre-post gai modification. Conclusion There is potential to lower risk for running-related stress fractures through gait modification techniques that control impact during early stance and dampen vibration.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nixon et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: