Distance running stride-to-stride variability for sagittal plane joint angles.

Recent research indicates that distance running stride-to-stride variability (SSV) is related to performance and injury. Previous studies have primarily focused on stride characteristics (stride length and time). We assessed SSV for sagittal plane joint angles with the primary purpose of testing for significant differences among the lower body joints. The secondary purpose was to determine if strong correlations exist among joint SSV measures. Thirty recreational adult runners participated in the study (8 females, 22 males, 39 ± 10 years; 53.1 ± 25.7 km/week). A 6-camera motion capture system (200 Hz) collected kinematic data during treadmill running at a preferred pace. A 2 by 3 repeated measures factorial ANOVA (phase-stance, swing; joint-hip, knee, ankle) was run (p = 0.05). There was a significant interaction effect (p < 0.001) and post hoc analysis revealed knee swing to be the most variable condition by far. For all three joints, there were strong correlations between stance and swing SSV (r = 0.80 to r = 0.88) and correlations among the joints were moderate to strong (r = 0.55 to 0.86). This study helps to better understand the joints/phases that contribute most to variability in the overall stride. Also, the strong correlations suggest that runners appear to have an overall SSV pattern that is similar across joints/phases.

Metabolic testing does not alter distance running lower body sagittal kinematics.

BACKGROUND: Distance running fitness is commonly assessed using metabolic testing (MT). During MT, the runner must wear a mask that covers the nose and mouth. It is unclear if this increased challenge alters running kinematics and/or stride-to-stride variability (SSV). In this study we thoroughly assess the sagittal plane lower body joint angles. RESEARCH QUESTION: Are there significant differences between standard treadmill running kinematics and those collected during MT? METHODS: Twenty recreational runners participated (34.8 ± 10.0 years; 20+ miles per week). Six Vicon Bonita cameras were used to collect kinematic data (200 Hz). A metabolic cart (Parvo Medics TrueOne 2400) was used for heart rate (HR) collection and testing. Participants ran 4 × 4 min at preferred pace: 2 control runs (CON) and 2 MT runs. Ten strides were used to generate average stance and swing joint angle plots. The phase plots were compared for CON and MT and mean difference scores were calculated (to determine the kinematic change). SSV was determined by assessing the standard deviations among the 10 strides. Repeated measures ANOVA was used to test for significant differences among CON and MT trials. Reliability was assessed for 8 discrete joint angles using ICC analysis. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between CON and MT for both the joint angle plot comparisons and SSV. For the discrete kinematic measures, ICC scores were strong (0.89-0.99) between CON and MT. During MT, there were slight increases (p < 0.01) in HR (145 ± 14 vs. 147 ± 14) and RPE (10.4 ± 1.5 vs. 11.4 ± 1.5). SIGNIFICANCE: Results from this study support the validity of simultaneously conducting a kinematic and MT analysis. However, clinicians and performance coaches should be aware that 1) MT is slightly more physiologically demanding than CON and 2) approaches from this study can be used during individual assessments to confirm that kinematics are similar (between CON and MT).