Gait asymmetry in spatiotemporal and kinetic variables does not increase running-related injury risk in lower limbs: a secondary analysis of a randomised trial including 800+ recreational runners.

Objective: To investigate asymmetry in spatiotemporal and kinetic variables in 800+ recreational runners, identify determinants of asymmetry, investigate if asymmetry is related to greater running injury risk and compare spatiotemporal and kinetic variables between the involved and uninvolved limb at baseline in runners having sustained an injury during follow-up. Methods: 836 healthy recreational runners (38.6% women) were tested on an instrumented treadmill at their preferred running speed at baseline and followed up for 6 months. From ground reaction force recordings, spatiotemporal and kinetic variables were derived for each lower limb. The Symmetry Index was computed for each variable. Correlations and multiple regression analyses were performed to identify potential determinants of asymmetry. Cox regression analyses investigated the association between asymmetry and injury risk. Analysis of variance for repeated measures was used to compare the involved and uninvolved limbs in runners who had sustained injuries during follow-up. Results: 107 participants reported at least one running-related injury. Leg length discrepancy and fat mass were the most common determinants of asymmetry, but all correlation coefficients were negligible (0.01-0.13) and explained variance was very low (multivariable-adjusted R2<0.01-0.03). Greater asymmetry for flight time and peak breaking force was associated with lower injury risk (HR (95% CI): 0.80 (0.64 to 0.99) and 0.96 (0.93 to 0.98), respectively). No between-limb differences were observed in runners having sustained an injury. Conclusion: Gait asymmetry was not associated with higher injury risk for investigated spatiotemporal and kinetic variables. Trial registration number: NCT03115437.

Impact of COVID-19 Vaccination on Short-Term Perceived Change in Physical Performance among Elite Athletes: An International Survey.

COVID-19 vaccination raised concerns about its potential effects on physical performance. To assess the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on the perceived change in physical performance, we conducted an online survey among elite athletes from Belgium, Canada, France and Luxembourg, with questions about socio-demographics, COVID-19 vaccination, perceived impact on physical performance and perceived pressure to get vaccinated. Full vaccination was defined as two doses of mRNA or vector vaccine or a heterologous vaccine scheme. Among 1106 eligible athletes contacted, 306 athletes answered the survey and were included in this study. Of these, 72% perceived no change in their physical performance, 4% an improvement and 24% a negative impact following full COVID-19 vaccination. For 82% of the included athletes, the duration of the negative vaccine reactions was ≤3 days. After adjustment for potential confounding variables, practicing an individual sport, a duration of vaccine reactions longer than 3 days, a high level of vaccine reaction and the perceived pressure to get vaccinated were independently associated with a perceived negative impact on physical performance of more than 3 days after the vaccination. The perceived pressure to get vaccinated appears to be a parameter associated with the negative perceived change in the physical performance and deserves further consideration.

Spatiotemporal and Ground-Reaction Force Characteristics as Risk Factors for Running-Related Injury: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Trial Including 800+ Recreational Runners.

BACKGROUND: Running biomechanics may play a role in running-related injury development, but to date, only a few modifiable factors have been prospectively associated with injury risk. PURPOSE: To identify risk factors among spatiotemporal and ground-reaction force characteristics in recreational runners and to investigate whether shoe cushioning modifies the association between running biomechanics and injury risk. STUDY DESIGN: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Recreational runners (N = 848) were tested on an instrumented treadmill at their preferred running speed in randomly allocated, standardized running shoes (with either hard or soft cushioning). Typical kinetic and spatiotemporal metrics were derived from ground-reaction force recordings. Participants were subsequently followed up for 6 months regarding running activity and injury. Cox regression models for competing risk were used to investigate the association between biomechanical risk factors and injury risk, including stratified analyses by shoe version. RESULTS: In the crude analysis, greater injury risk was found for greater step length (subhazard rate ratio [SHR], 1.01; 95% CI, 1.00-1.02; P = .038), longer flight time (SHR, 1.00; 95% CI, 1.00-1.01; P = .028), shorter contact time (SHR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.99-1.00; P = .030), and lower duty factor (defined as the ratio between contact time and stride time; SHR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.91-0.98; P = .005). In the stratified analyses by shoe version, adjusted for previous injury and running speed, lower duty factor was associated with greater injury risk in those using the soft shoes (SHR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.85-0.99; P = .042) but not in those using the hard shoes (SHR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.91-1.04; P = .348). CONCLUSION: Lower duty factor is an injury risk factor, especially for softer shoe use. Contrary to widespread beliefs, vertical impact peak, loading rate, and step rate were not injury risk factors in recreational runners. REGISTRATION: NCT03115437 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

Exercise-Based Injury Prevention in High-Level and Professional Athletes: Narrative Review and Proposed Standard Operating Procedure for Future Lockdown-Like Contexts After COVID-19.

In regular times, implementing exercise-based injury prevention programs into the training routine of high-level and professional athletes represents a key and challenging aspect to decrease injury risk. Barriers to implementing such prevention programs have previously been identified such as lack of resources, logistic issues or motivation. The COVID-19 pandemic associated with restrictions on daily life dramatically impacted sports participation from training to competition. It is therefore reasonable to assume that such lockdown-like context has exacerbated the challenge to implement exercise-based injury prevention programs, potentially leading to a greater musculoskeletal injury risk. In this narrative review, recommendations are proposed for building an expertise- and evidence-based Standard Operating Procedure for injury prevention in lockdown-like contexts for high-level and professional athletes. The following recommendations can be provided: (1) assess the global and sport-specific risks in the light of the ongoing cause of isolation; (2) adapt remote training materials and programs; (3) ensure regular quality communication within the staff, between athletes and the staff as well as between athletes; (4) follow the athlete's mental well-being; and (5) plan for a safe return-to-sports as well as for an ongoing monitoring of the load-recovery balance. These key domains should further be addressed to comply with local policies, which are subject to change over time in each individual country. The use of these recommendations may improve the readiness of athletes, coaches, physicians and all sports stakeholders for future lockdown-like contexts.

Effect of shoe cushioning on landing impact forces and spatiotemporal parameters during running: results from a randomized trial including 800+ recreational runners.

AbstractIn a recent randomized trial including 800+ recreational runners, injury risk was lower in those who received the Soft shoe version compared to those using the Hard version (Hazard ratio = 1.52; 95% Confidence Interval = 1.07-2.16). Here, we investigated the effect of shoe cushioning on ground reaction forces (GRF) and spatiotemporal parameters in the same cohort, with a special focus on Vertical Impact Peak Force (VIPF) and Vertical Instantaneous Loading Rate (VILR). Healthy runners (n = 848) randomly received one of two shoe prototypes that differed only in their cushioning properties (Global stiffness: 61 ± 3 and 95 ± 6 N/mm in the Soft and Hard versions, respectively). Participants were tested on an instrumented treadmill at their preferred running speed. GRF data was recorded over 2 min. VIPF was higher in the Soft shoe group compared to the Hard shoe group (1.53 ± 0.21 vs. 1.44 ± 0.23 BW, respectively; p < 0.001). However, the proportion of steps with detectable VIPF was lower in the Soft shoe group (84 vs. 97%, respectively; p < 0.001) and Time to VIPF was longer (46.9 ± 8.5 vs. 43.4 ± 7.4 milliseconds, respectively; p < 0.001). No significant differences were observed for VILR (60.1 ± 13.8 vs. 58.9 ± 15.6 BW/s for Soft and Hard shoe group, respectively; p = 0.070) or any other kinetic variable. These results show that the beneficial effect of greater shoe cushioning on injury risk in the present cohort is not associated with attenuated VIPF and VILR. These GRF metrics may be inappropriate markers of the shoe cushioning-injury risk relationship, while delayed VIPF and the proportion of steps displaying a VIPF could be more relevant.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03115437..

Motivational Interviewing to Increase Physical Activity Behavior in Cancer Patients: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVE: This pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) aimed at evaluating the feasibility and potential efficacy of a motivational interviewing (MI) intervention to increase physical activity (PA) behavior in cancer patients. METHODS: Participants were randomly assigned to an experimental group with standard care plus 12 MI sessions within 12 weeks or a control group with standard care only. The number of recruited participants and the modality of recruitment were recorded to describe the reach of the study. The acceptability of the study was estimated using the attrition rate during the intervention phase. The potential efficacy of the intervention was evaluated by analyzing the PA behavior. RESULTS: Twenty-five participants were recruited within the 16-month recruitment period (1.6 participants per month). Five participants (38.5%) from the experimental group (n = 13) and one participant (8.3%) from the control group (n = 12) dropped out of the study before the end of the intervention phase. No group by time interaction effect for PA behavior was observed at the end of the intervention. CONCLUSION: Due to the low recruitment rate and compliance, no conclusion can be drawn regarding the efficacy of MI to increase PA behavior in cancer patients. Moreover, the current literature cannot provide any evidence on the effectiveness of MI to increase PA in cancer survivors. Future RCTs should consider that the percentage of uninterested patients to join the study may be as high as 60%. Overrecruitment (30% to 40%) is also recommended to accommodate the elevated attrition rate.

Shoe Cushioning Influences the Running Injury Risk According to Body Mass: A Randomized Controlled Trial Involving 848 Recreational Runners.

BACKGROUND: Shoe cushioning is expected to protect runners against repetitive loading of the musculoskeletal system and therefore running-related injuries. Also, it is a common belief that heavier runners should use footwear with increased shock absorption properties to prevent injuries. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine if shoe cushioning influences the injury risk in recreational runners and whether the association depends on the runner's body mass. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. METHODS: Healthy runners (n = 848) randomly received 1 of 2 shoe prototypes that only differed in their cushioning properties. Global stiffness was 61.3 ± 2.7 and 94.9 ± 5.9 N/mm in the soft and hard versions, respectively. Participants were classified as light or heavy according to their body mass using the median as a cut-off (78.2 and 62.8 kg in male and female runners, respectively). They were followed over 6 months regarding running activity and injury (any physical complaint reducing/interrupting running activity for at least 7 days). Data were analyzed through time-to-event models with the subhazard rate ratio (SHR) and their 95% confidence interval (CI) as measures of association. A stratified analysis was conducted to investigate the effect of shoe cushioning on the injury risk in lighter and heavier runners. RESULTS: The runners who had received the hard shoes had a higher injury risk (SHR, 1.52 [95% CI, 1.07-2.16]), while body mass was not associated with the injury risk (SHR, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.99-1.01]). However, after stratification according to body mass, results showed that lighter runners had a higher injury risk in hard shoes (SHR, 1.80 [95% CI, 1.09-2.98]) while heavier runners did not (SHR, 1.23 [95% CI, 0.75-2.03]). CONCLUSION: The injury risk was higher in participants running in the hard shoes compared with those using the soft shoes. However, the relative protective effect of greater shoe cushioning was found only in lighter runners. REGISTRATION: NCT03115437 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

Influence of sports flooring and shoes on impact forces and performance during jump tasks.

We aim to determine the influence of sports floorings and sports shoes on impact mechanics and performance during standardised jump tasks. Twenty-one male volunteers performed ankle jumps (four consecutive maximal bounds with very dynamic ankle movements) and multi-jumps (two consecutive maximal counter-movement jumps) on force plates using minimalist and cushioned shoes under 5 sports flooring (SF) conditions. The shock absorption properties of the SF, defined as the proportion of peak impact force absorbed by the tested flooring when compared with a concrete hard surface, were: SF0 = 0% (no flooring), SF1 = 19%, SF2 = 26%, SF3 = 37% and SF4 = 45%. Shoe and flooring effects were compared using 2x5 repeated-measures ANOVA with post-hoc Bonferroni-corrected comparisons. A significant interaction between SF and shoe conditions was found for VILR only (p = 0.003). In minimalist shoes, SF influenced Vertical Instantaneous Loading Rate (VILR) during ankle jumps (p = 0.006) and multi-jumps (p<0.001), in accordance with shock absorption properties. However, in cushioned shoes, SF influenced VILR during ankle jumps only (p<0.001). Contact Time was the only additional variable affected by SF, but only during multi-jumps in minimalist shoes (p = 0.037). Cushioned shoes induced lower VILR (p<0.001) and lower Contact Time (p≤0.002) during ankle jumps and multi-jumps compared to minimalist shoes. During ankle jumps, cushioned shoes induced greater Peak Vertical Ground Reaction Force (PVGRF, p = 0.002), greater Vertical Average Loading Rate (p<0.001), and lower eccentric (p = 0.008) and concentric (p = 0.004) work. During multi-jumps, PVGRF was lower (p<0.001) and jump height was higher (p<0.001) in cushioned compared to minimalist shoes. In conclusion, cushioning influenced impact forces during standardised jump tasks, whether it was provided by the shoes or the sports flooring. VILR is the variable that was the most affected.

Shoe cushioning, body mass and running biomechanics as risk factors for running injury: a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Repetitive loading of the musculoskeletal system is suggested to be involved in the underlying mechanism of the majority of running-related injuries (RRIs). Accordingly, heavier runners are assumed to be at a higher risk of RRI. The cushioning system of modern running shoes is expected to protect runners again high impact forces, and therefore, RRI. However, the role of shoe cushioning in injury prevention remains unclear. The main aim of this study is to investigate the influence of shoe cushioning and body mass on RRI risk, while exploring simultaneously the association between running technique and RRI risk. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This double-blinded randomised controlled trial will involve about 800 healthy leisure-time runners. They will randomly receive one of two running shoe models that will differ in their cushioning properties (ie, stiffness) by ~35%. The participants will perform a running test on an instrumented treadmill at their preferred running speed at baseline. Then they will be followed up prospectively over a 6-month period, during which they will self-report all their sports activities as well as any injury in an internet-based database TIPPS (Training and Injury Prevention Platform for Sports). Cox regression analyses will be used to compare injury risk between the study groups and to investigate the association among training, biomechanical and anatomical risk factors, and injury risk. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the National Ethics Committee for Research (Ref: 201701/02 v1.1). Outcomes will be disseminated through publications in peer-reviewed journals, presentations at international conferences, as well as articles in popular magazines and on specialised websites. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03115437, Pre-results.

Effect of Promotional Initiatives on Visits to a Dedicated Website for Physical Activity and Non-Communicable Disease in Luxembourg: An Event Study.

The Sport-Santé project and its website (www.sport-sante.lu) promote physical activity for individuals with non-communicable diseases (NCDs) in Luxembourg. Our purpose was to perform an event study analysis to evaluate the effects of communication and promotional initiatives on the number of visits to the Sport-Santé website. Between September 2015 and May 2016, the Sport-Santé website was promoted during different initiatives, including participation in health-related events or publication of articles in local journals. The daily number of visits to www.sport-sante.lu website (i.e., our outcome) was recorded using Google Analytics and compared to a counterfactual collected with its benchmarking tool. The counterfactual was defined as the daily number of visits to websites in the same field. A model was created to evaluate the relationship between the number of visits to www.sport-sante.lu website and the number of visits to similar websites during a control period with no promotional initiatives (from July 2015 to September 2015). The effect of promotional initiatives was subsequently tested, by comparing the actual number of visits to our website (up to 2 days after each event) with the theoretical number of visits predicted by the model. Twenty-two initiatives were identified, of which 11 were participations at major health-related events and 11 publications of popular science articles. Of these 22 initiatives, the event study identified 2 popular science articles and 1 interactive workshop that significantly increased the daily number of visits to the www.sport-sante.lu website. One of the two articles was published on the day before the workshop was held, which did not allow us to distinguish its specific impact. The second article was published in the main national newspaper. This is the first time to our knowledge that an event study analysis has been used to evaluate the impact of promotional initiatives on the number of visits to a dedicated website for physical activity and NCDs. Our results indicate that some initiatives can aid in the number of visits, but in general their impact is limited. To observe an increased rate of participation in physical activity, additional promotional and evaluative strategies should be explored.

Adaptation of running pattern to the drop of standard cushioned shoes: A randomised controlled trial with a 6-month follow-up.

OBJECTIVES: While several cross-sectional studies have investigated the acute effects of shoe drop on running biomechanics, the long-term consequences are currently unknown. This study aimed to investigate if the drop of standard cushioned shoes induces specific adaptations in running technique over a six-month period in leisure-time runners. DESIGN: Double-blinded randomised controlled trial. METHODS: The participants (n=59) received a pair of shoes with a heel-to-toe drop of 10mm (D10), 6mm (D6) or 0mm (D0) and were followed-up regarding running training over 6 months or 500km, whichever came first. Spatio-temporal variables and kinematics (foot/ground, ankle and knee joint angles) were investigated while running at preferred speed on a treadmill before and after the follow-up. RESULTS: The participants ran 332±178km in the study shoes between pre- and post-tests. There was no shoe version by time interaction for any of the spatio-temporal variables nor for lower limb angles at initial ground contact. A small but significant shoe drop effect was found for knee abduction at mid-stance (p=0.032), as it decreased for the D0 version (-0.3±3.1 vs. -1.3±2.6°) while it increased for the D6 (0.3±2.7 vs. 1.3±3.1°) and D10 version (-0.2±3.2 vs. 0.5±3.1°). However, none of the pairwise comparisons was significant in the post-hoc analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Apart from knee abduction at mid-stance, no specific adaptation in spatio-temporal variables and kinematics was found between the three shoe versions during this 6-month follow-up. Thus, shoe drop of standard cushioned shoes does not seem to influence running biomechanics in the long term.

Influence of the Heel-to-Toe Drop of Standard Cushioned Running Shoes on Injury Risk in Leisure-Time Runners: A Randomized Controlled Trial With 6-Month Follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Modern running shoes are available in a wide range of heel-to-toe drops (ie, the height difference between the forward and rear parts of the inside of the shoe). While shoe drop has been shown to influence strike pattern, its effect on injury risk has never been investigated. Therefore, the reasons for such variety in this parameter are unclear. PURPOSE: The first aim of this study was to determine whether the drop of standard cushioned running shoes influences running injury risk. The secondary aim was to investigate whether recent running regularity modifies the relationship between shoe drop and injury risk. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. METHODS: Leisure-time runners (N = 553) were observed for 6 months after having received a pair of shoes with a heel-to-toe drop of 10 mm (D10), 6 mm (D6), or 0 mm (D0). All participants reported their running activities and injuries (time-loss definition, at least 1 day) in an electronic system. Cox regression analyses were used to compare injury risk between the 3 groups based on hazard rate ratios (HRs) and their 95% CIs. A stratified analysis was conducted to evaluate the effect of shoe drop in occasional runners (<6 months of weekly practice over the previous 12 months) versus regular runners (≥6 months). RESULTS: The overall injury risk was not different among the participants who had received the D6 (HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.86-1.98) or D0 (HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.76-1.80) versions compared with the D10 shoes. After stratification according to running regularity, low-drop shoes (D6 and D0) were found to be associated with a lower injury risk in occasional runners (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.23-0.98), whereas these shoes were associated with a higher injury risk in regular runners (HR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.07-2.62). CONCLUSION: Overall, injury risk was not modified by the drop of standard cushioned running shoes. However, low-drop shoes could be more hazardous for regular runners, while these shoes seem to be preferable for occasional runners to limit injury risk.

Plantar pressure measurements and running-related injury: A systematic review of methods and possible associations.

Pressure-sensitive measuring devices have been identified as appropriate tools for measuring an array of parameters during running. It is unclear which biomechanical characteristics relate to running-related injury (RRI) and which data-processing techniques are most promising to detect this relationship. This systematic review aims to identify pertinent methodologies and characteristics measured using plantar pressure devices, and to summarise their associations with RRI. PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, ScienceDirect and Scopus were searched up until March 2015. Retrospective and prospective, biomechanical studies on running using any kind of pressure-sensitive device with RRI as an outcome were included. All studies involving regular or recreational runners were considered. The study quality was assessed and the measured parameters were summarised. One low quality, two moderate quality and five high quality studies were included. Five different subdivisions of plantar area were identified, as well as five instants and four phases of measurement during foot-ground contact. Overall many parameters were collated and subdivided as plantar pressure and force, plantar pressure and force location, contact area, timing and stride parameters. Differences between the injured and control group were found for mediolateral and anteroposterior displacement of force, contact area, velocity of force displacement, relative force-time integral, mediolateral force ratio, time to peak force and inter-stride correlative patterns. However, no consistent results were found between studies and no biomechanical risk patterns were apparent. Additionally, conflicting findings were reported for peak force in three studies. Based on these observations, we provide suggestions for improved methodology measurement of pertinent parameters for future studies.

Injury risk in runners using standard or motion control shoes: a randomised controlled trial with participant and assessor blinding.

BACKGROUND/AIM: This randomised controlled trial investigated if the usage of running shoes with a motion control system modifies injury risk in regular leisure-time runners compared to standard shoes, and if this influence depends on foot morphology. METHODS: Recreational runners (n=372) were given either the motion control or the standard version of a regular running shoe model and were followed up for 6 months regarding running activity and injury. Foot morphology was analysed using the Foot Posture Index method. Cox regression analyses were used to compare injury risk between the two groups, based on HRs and their 95% CIs, controlling for potential confounders. Stratified analyses were conducted to evaluate the effect of motion control system in runners with supinated, neutral and pronated feet. RESULTS: The overall injury risk was lower among the participants who had received motion control shoes (HR=0.55; 95% CI 0.36 to 0.85) compared to those receiving standard shoes. This positive effect was only observed in the stratum of runners with pronated feet (n=94; HR=0.34; 95% CI 0.13 to 0.84); there was no difference in runners with neutral (n=218; HR=0.78; 95% CI 0.44 to 1.37) or supinated feet (n=60; HR=0.59; 95% CI 0.20 to 1.73). Runners with pronated feet using standard shoes had a higher injury risk compared to those with neutral feet (HR=1.80; 95% CI 1.01 to 3.22). CONCLUSIONS: The overall injury risk was lower in participants who had received motion control shoes. Based on secondary analysis, those with pronated feet may benefit most from this shoe type.

The effect of shoe type and fatigue on strike index and spatiotemporal parameters of running.

We aimed to observe differences in running style parameters and the stride-to-stride coefficient of variation and correlative patterns using detrended fluctuation analysis (DFA) between conventional and first-time minimalistic shoe use. We also aimed to study the effect of fatigue on these parameters. 26 recreational runners were tested using a pressure insole device on a treadmill whilst wearing conventional (CONV) and minimalistic (MIN) shoes. They then performed a prolonged running bout simulating a fatiguing training session, before being tested a second time in both shoe types. Average values of strike index (initial ground contact point on the footsole expressed as a percentage of total sole length) were not significantly different between CONV [25.7±14.6% (unfatigued), 23.1±11.1% (fatigued)] and MIN [28.9±19.1% (unfatigued), 26.7±17.6% (fatigued)] (p=0.501). The fatigued state also yielded a similar strike index compared to the unfatigued state (p=0.661). An overall trend in decreased inter-stride correlative patterns of strike index was observed in MIN compared to CONV (p=0.075). No differences in contact time, flight time, stride time, duty factor, stride length and stride frequency were found between shoe types. A trend in reduced flight time (p=0.078) and therefore increased duty factor (p=0.053) was observed due to fatigue. We conclude that in recreational runners, no meaningful, acute adaptation in running style occurs as a result of first-time MIN use. Similarly, runners were able to maintain their running style after a prolonged running bout.

A step towards understanding the mechanisms of running-related injuries.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the association between training-related characteristics and running-related injury using a new conceptual model for running-related injury generation, focusing on the synergy between training load and previous injuries, short-term running experience or body mass index (> or < 25 kg m(-2)). DESIGN: Prospective cohort study with a 9-month follow-up. METHODS: The data of two previous studies using the same methodology were revisited. Recreational runners (n = 517) reported information about running training characteristics (weekly distance, frequency, speed), other sport participation and injuries on a dedicated internet platform. Weekly volume (dichotomized into < 2h and ≥ 2 h) and session frequency (dichotomized into < 2 and ≥ 2) were the main exposures because they were considered necessary causes for running-related injury. Non-training-related characteristics were included in Cox regression analyses as effect-measure modifiers. Hazard ratio was the measure of association. The size of effect-measure modification was calculated as the relative excess risk due to interaction. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-seven runners reported a running-related injury. Crude analyses revealed that weekly volume < 2h (hazard ratio = 3.29; 95% confidence intervals = 2.27; 4.79) and weekly session frequency < 2 (hazard ratio = 2.41; 95% confidence intervals = 1.71; 3.42) were associated with increased injury rate. Previous injury was identified as an effect-measure modifier on weekly volume (relative excess risk due to interaction = 4.69; 95% confidence intervals = 1.42; 7.95; p = 0.005) and session frequency (relative excess risk due to interaction = 2.44; 95% confidence intervals = 0.48; 4.39; p = 0.015). A negative synergy was found between body mass index and weekly volume (relative excess risk due to interaction = -2.88; 95% confidence intervals = -5.10; -0.66; p = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: The effect of a runner's training load on running-related injury is influenced by body mass index and previous injury. These results show the importance to distinguish between confounding and effect-measure modification in running-related injury research.

Reliability and validity of pressure and temporal parameters recorded using a pressure-sensitive insole during running.

Running biomechanics has received increasing interest in recent literature on running-related injuries, calling for new, portable methods for large-scale measurements. Our aims were to define running strike pattern based on output of a new pressure-sensitive measurement device, the Runalyser, and to test its validity regarding temporal parameters describing running gait. Furthermore, reliability of the Runalyser measurements was evaluated, as well as its ability to discriminate different running styles. Thirty-one healthy participants (30.3 ± 7.4 years, 1.78 ± 0.10 m and 74.1 ± 12.1 kg) were involved in the different study parts. Eleven participants were instructed to use a rearfoot (RFS), midfoot (MFS) and forefoot (FFS) strike pattern while running on a treadmill. Strike pattern was subsequently defined using a linear regression (R(2)=0.89) between foot strike angle, as determined by motion analysis (1000 Hz), and strike index (SI, point of contact on the foot sole, as a percentage of foot sole length), as measured by the Runalyser. MFS was defined by the 95% confidence interval of the intercept (SI=43.9-49.1%). High agreement (overall mean difference 1.2%) was found between stance time, flight time, stride time and duty factor as determined by the Runalyser and a force-measuring treadmill (n=16 participants). Measurements of the two devices were highly correlated (R ≥ 0.80) and not significantly different. Test-retest intra-class correlation coefficients for all parameters were ≥ 0.94 (n=14 participants). Significant differences (p<0.05) between FFS, RFS and habitual running were detected regarding SI, stance time and stride time (n=24 participants). The Runalyser is suitable for, and easily applicable in large-scale studies on running biomechanics.