Influence of rearfoot and forefoot midsole hardness on biomechanical and perception variables during heel-toe running

Abstract Purpose: Running shoe cushioning research has focused widely on rearfoot (RF) characteristics, whereas forefoot (FF) characteristics have been rather neglected. However, altered cushioning may affect running biomechanics and respective subjective perception at RF and FF. Thus, this research compared the effect of running shoes with different midsole hardnesses at RF and FF. Methods: Twenty-eight heel-toe runners were tested in five experimental shoe conditions that featured three segmented EVA midsoles (RF, midfoot (MF), FF). Three conditions had the same midsole hardness at RF and FF (soft (SS), medium (MM), hard (HH)). Two conditions had different RF and FF midsole hardness (soft-RF/hard-FF (SH), hard-RF/soft-FF (HS)). All midsoles featured the same MF segment of medium hardness. Vertical ground reaction forces and lower extremity kinematics during stance, subjective cushioning of the heel-toe transition and the overall comfort were quantified. Data were analysed using Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests, repeated measures ANOVA, Bonferroni post-hoc tests (p < 0.05), and effect size analyses (pη2). Results: The consistent midsole shoe conditions showed increased maximum loading rates of impact and propulsion peaks from SS to HH. Respective maximum loading rates of SH were similarly to SS, and respective maximum loading rates for HS were similar to HH. Subjectively, the consistent midsole conditions were rated according to their mechanical properties and softer shoes were preferred over harder shoes. In the varied midsole shoe conditions, SH was perceived similar to SS, whereas HS was perceived similar to MM. Conclusion: The examined biomechanical variables were influenced almost entirely by respective RF cushioning properties. The hard FF did not negatively affect cushioning perception as long as the RF was soft. Combining a soft FF with a hard RF improved inferior cushioning perception associated with shoes being hard at RF and FF.

[1]  Benno M Nigg,et al.  Shoe midsole hardness, sex and age effects on lower extremity kinematics during running. , 2012, Journal of biomechanics.

[2]  Thorsten Sterzing,et al.  Sensitivity Mapping of the Human Foot: Thresholds at 30 Skin Locations , 2009, Foot & ankle international.

[3]  Thomas L Milani,et al.  Perceptual and biomechanical variables for running in identical shoe constructions with varying midsole hardness. , 1997, Clinical biomechanics.

[4]  W. Kraemer,et al.  FOOT STRIKE PATTERNS OF RUNNERS AT THE 15‐KM POINT DURING AN ELITE‐LEVEL HALF MARATHON , 2007, Journal of strength and conditioning research.

[5]  Joseph Hamill,et al.  Variability of Stride Characteristics and Joint Coordination among Individuals with Unilateral Patellofemoral Pain , 2002 .

[6]  B. Nigg,et al.  Gender, age and midsole hardness effects on lower extremity muscle activity during running , 2011 .

[7]  S. Hasan,et al.  Relationship between vertical ground reaction force and speed during walking, slow jogging, and running. , 1996, Clinical biomechanics.

[8]  Darren J Stefanyshyn,et al.  Shoe midsole longitudinal bending stiffness and running economy, joint energy, and EMG. , 2006, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[9]  Brigit De Wit,et al.  The Effect of Varying Midsole Hardness on impact Forces and Foot Motion during Foot Contact in Running , 1995 .

[10]  Joseph Hamill,et al.  Impact characteristics in shod and barefoot running , 2011 .

[11]  I. Davis,et al.  Foot strike patterns and collision forces in habitually barefoot versus shod runners , 2010, Nature.

[12]  A. Mündermann,et al.  Development of a reliable method to assess footwear comfort during running. , 2002, Gait & posture.

[13]  Joseph Hamill,et al.  Cushioning mode and magnitude affect treadmill running kinematics , 2011 .

[14]  B M Nigg,et al.  Impact Forces and Muscle Tuning: A New Paradigm , 2001, Exercise and sport sciences reviews.

[15]  Thorsten Sterzing,et al.  Heel strike angle and foot angular velocity in the sagittal plane during running in different shoe conditions , 2008, Journal of Foot and Ankle Research.

[16]  Brigit De Wit,et al.  Biomechanical analysis of the stance phase during barefoot and shod running. , 2000, Journal of biomechanics.

[17]  S. James,et al.  Injuries to runners , 1974, The American journal of sports medicine.

[18]  Thorsten Sterzing,et al.  Gender and age related requirements of running shoes: a questionnaire on 4501 runners , 2011 .

[19]  B. Nigg,et al.  The effect of material characteristics of shoe soles on muscle activation and energy aspects during running. , 2003, Journal of biomechanics.

[20]  Gert-Peter Brüggemann,et al.  Midsole Material-Related Force Control During Heel–Toe Running , 2006, Research in sports medicine.

[21]  Ewald M. Hennig Eighteen years of running shoe testing in Germany – a series of biomechanical studies , 2011 .

[22]  Clare E. Milner,et al.  Biomechanical factors associated with tibial stress fracture in female runners. , 2006, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[23]  B M Nigg,et al.  The Role of Impact Forces and Foot Pronation: A New Paradigm , 2001, Clinical journal of sport medicine : official journal of the Canadian Academy of Sport Medicine.

[24]  T. Sterzing,et al.  Systematically modified crash-pad reduces impact shock in running shoes , 2010 .

[25]  L. B. Cooper,et al.  Effects of Shoe Cushioning Upon Ground Reaction Forces in Running , 1983, International journal of sports medicine.

[26]  Peter Goldsmith,et al.  A comparison of forefoot stiffness in running and running shoe bending stiffness. , 2005, Journal of biomechanics.

[27]  A. Belli,et al.  Mechanical comparison of barefoot and shod running. , 2005, International journal of sports medicine.

[28]  Joseph Hamill,et al.  Kinematic adaptations during running: effects of footwear, surface, and duration. , 2004, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.