Prognosis and prognostic factors of running-related injuries in novice runners: A prospective cohort study

Hip and core exercise programme prevents running-related overuse injuries in adult novice recreational runners: a three-arm randomised controlled trial (Run RCT)

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to investigate the efficacy of two exercise interventions in reducing lower extremity (LE) injuries in novice recreational runners.

METHODS

Novice runners (245 female, 80 male) were randomised into hip and core (n=108), ankle and foot (n=111) or control (n=106) groups. Interventions were completed before running and included exercise programmes focusing on either (1) hip and core or (2) ankle and foot muscles. The control group performed static stretching exercises. All groups were supervised by a physiotherapist and performed the same running programme. Injuries and running exposure were registered using weekly questionnaires during the 24-week study. Primary outcome was running-related LE injury.

RESULTS

The incidence of LE injuries was lower in the hip and core group compared with the control group (HR 0.66; 95% CI 0.45 to 0.97). The average weekly prevalence of overuse injuries was 39% lower (prevalence rate ratio, PRR 0.61, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.96), and the prevalence of substantial overuse injuries was 52% lower (PRR 0.48, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.90) in the hip and core group compared with the control group. No significant difference was observed between the ankle and foot group and control group in the prevalence of overuse injuries. A higher incidence of acute injuries was observed in the ankle and foot group compared with the control group (HR 3.60, 95% CI 1.20 to 10.86).

CONCLUSION

A physiotherapist-guided hip and core-focused exercise programme was effective in preventing LE injuries in novice recreational runners. The ankle and foot programme did not reduce LE injuries and did not protect against acute LE injuries when compared with static stretching.

What makes an athlete? A scoping review: Assessing the use of the word athlete with anterior cruciate ligament rehabilitation review studies. Is there a standard?

The term athlete does not currently have an agreed definition or standardized use across the literature. We analyzed the use of the term "athlete" amongst review studies specific to Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) rehabilitation to investigate if the term was justified in its use. A comprehensive review of a database was performed to identify review papers which used the term "athlete" in the title, and which were related to ACL rehabilitation and surveillance. These papers were analyzed and their source papers were extracted for review. Twenty-eight review papers were identified. Source studies were extracted and analyzed. After removal of duplicates 223 source papers were identified. Despite using the term "athlete" in the review study titles only 5/17 (10.7%) sufficiently justified the use of this term. The term athlete was used in 117/223 (52.5%) of the source studies. Of those, 78/117 source studies (66.7%) justified the term athlete. The remaining 39/117 (33.3%) papers where participants were stated to be athletes, gave no justification. The ambiguous use of the term athlete amongst published studies highlights the need for a definition or justification of the term to be used in studies. The lack of a standard definition leads to the potential for studies to dilute high quality data by the potentially differing rehabilitation requirements and access to resources available to those with varying exercise levels. The indiscriminate use of the term athlete could lead to participants with widely ranging physical activity levels being included in the same study, and being used to create clinical advice for all. Advice could potentially vary across those of differing physical activity levels.

Running-Related Achilles Tendon Injury: A Prospective Biomechanical Study in Recreational Runners

There are relatively few running studies that have attempted to prospectively identify biomechanical risk factors associated with Achilles tendon (AT) injuries. Therefore, the aim was to prospectively determine potential running biomechanical risk factors associated with the development of AT injuries in recreational, healthy runners. At study entry, 108 participants completed a set of questionnaires. They underwent an analysis of their running biomechanics at self-selected running speed. The incidence of AT running-related injuries (RRI) was assessed after 1-year using a weekly questionnaire standardized for RRI. Potential biomechanical risk factors for the development of AT RRI injury were identified using multivariable logistic regression. Of the 103 participants, 25% of the sample (15 males and 11 females) reported an AT RRI on the right lower limb during the 1-year evaluation period. A more flexed knee at initial contact (odds ratio = 1.146, P = .034) and at the midstance phase (odds ratio = 1.143, P = .037) were significant predictors for developing AT RRI. The results suggested that a 1-degree increase in knee flexion at initial contact and midstance was associated with a 15% increase in the risk of an AT RRI, thus causing a limitation of training or a stoppage of running in runners.

Does orthotics use improve comfort, speed, and injury rate during running? A randomised control trial

BACKGROUND

Running is a hugely popular sport. Unfortunately, running-related injury (RRI) rates are high, particularly amongst amateur and recreational runners. Finding ways to reduce RRI rates and maximise comfort and performance for runners is important. Evidence regarding whether orthotics can successfully improve these parameters is limited and contradicting. Further research is required to provide runners with clearer guidance on the usefulness of orthotics.

AIM

To investigate the effect of Aetrex Orthotics on comfort, speed and RRI rates during recreational running.

METHODS

One hundred and six recreational runners were recruited on a voluntary basis via running clubs and social media pages and randomised into either the intervention or control group. Participants in the intervention group ran with Aetrex L700 Speed Orthotics inserted in their usual running shoes, whilst participants in the control group ran in their usual running shoes with no orthotics. The study ran for an 8-wk period. Participants provided data relating to running comfort, distance, and time during weeks 3-6. Participants provided data relating to any RRIs they sustained during all 8 wks. Running distance and time were used to calculate running speed in miles per hour (mph). For each outcome variable, 95% confidence intervals and P values were calculated to assess the statistical significance between the groups. For comfort and speed data, univariate multi-level analysis was performed, and for outcome variables with significant between group differences, multi-level multivariate analysis was performed to evaluate any confounding effects of gender and age.

RESULTS

Ninety-four participants were included in the final analysis (drop-out rate = 11%). Comfort and speed from 940 runs and 978 injury data reports were analysed. Participants who ran with orthotics reported, on average, speeds 0.30 mph faster (P = 0.20) and comfort scores 1.27 points higher (P ≤ 0.001) than participants who ran with no orthotics. They were also 2.22 times less likely to sustain an injury (P = 0.08) than participants who ran with no orthotics. However, findings were only significant for comfort and not for speed or injury rates. Age and gender were found to be significant predictors of comfort. However, the improvements in comfort reported by participants who ran with orthotics were still significant after adjusting for age and gender.

CONCLUSION

This study found orthotics to improve comfort and speed and prevent RRIs whilst running. However, these findings were only statistically significant for comfort.

Factors Associated With Running-Related Injuries in Recreational Runners With a History of Running Injuries

OBJECTIVE

To identify the incidence and characteristics associated with a higher injury risk in recreational runners who suffered a running-related injury (RRI) in the previous 12 months.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study among recreational runners who registered for a Dutch running event (5-42.2 km) and suffered an RRI in the 12 months before inclusion.

SETTING

Open population.

PARTICIPANTS

Recreational runners with a previous reported injury.

ASSESSMENT OF RISK FACTORS

At baseline, information on demographics, training characteristics, health complaints, and RRI history was collected.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

With 3 follow-up questionnaires (2 weeks before, 1 day after, and 1 month after the running event), the occurrence of new RRIs was registered.

RESULTS

In total, 548 participants (55.1%) sustained a new RRI during follow-up. In total, 20.5% of the new RRIs was located at the same anatomical location as the previous RRI. Runners who registered for a marathon had a higher chance to sustain a new RRI [odd ratio (OR) 1.72; 95% confidence intervals (CIs), 1.17-2.53]. Also previous RRIs in the upper leg (OR 1.59; 95% CI, 1.15-2.19) and lower leg (OR 1.61; 95% CI, 1.18-2.21) were associated with an increased injury risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Especially being a marathon runner and the anatomical location of previous RRIs seem to be associated with the injury risk in recreational runners with a previous RRI.

Strategies to prevent and manage running-related knee injuries: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of interventions to prevent and manage knee injuries in runners.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science and SPORTDiscus up to May 2022.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with a primary aim of evaluating the effectiveness of intervention(s) to prevent or manage running-related knee injury.

RESULTS

Thirty RCTs (18 prevention, 12 management) analysed multiple interventions in novice and recreational running populations. Low-certainty evidence (one trial, 320 participants) indicated that running technique retraining (to land softer) reduced the risk of knee injury compared with control treadmill running (risk ratio (RR) 0.32, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.63). Very low-certainty to low-certainty evidence from 17 other prevention trials (participant range: 24 -3287) indicated that various footwear options, multicomponent exercise therapy, graduated running programmes and online and in person injury prevention education programmes did not influence knee injury risk (RR range: 0.55-1.06). In runners with patellofemoral pain, very low-certainty to low-certainty evidence indicated that running technique retraining strategies, medial-wedged foot orthoses, multicomponent exercise therapy and osteopathic manipulation can reduce knee pain in the short-term (standardised mean difference range: -4.96 to -0.90).

CONCLUSION

There is low-certainty evidence that running technique retraining to land softer may reduce knee injury risk by two-thirds. Very low-certainty to low-certainty evidence suggests that running-related patellofemoral pain may be effectively managed through a variety of active (eg, running technique retraining, multicomponent exercise therapy) and passive interventions (eg, foot orthoses, osteopathic manipulation).

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020150630.

The Effects of Cadence Manipulation on Joint Kinetic Patterns and Stride-to-Stride Kinetic Variability in Female Runners

Altering running cadence is commonly done to reduce the risk of running-related injury/reinjury. This study examined how altering running cadence affects joint kinetic patterns and stride-to-stride kinetic variability in uninjured female runners. Twenty-four uninjured female recreational runners ran on an instrumented treadmill with their typical running cadence and with a running cadence that was 7.5% higher and 7.5% lower than typical. Ground reaction force and kinematic data were recorded during each condition, and principal component analysis was used to capture the primary sources of variability from the sagittal plane hip, knee, and ankle moment time series. Runners exhibited a reduction in the magnitude of their knee extension moments when they increased their cadence and an increase in their knee extension moments when they lowered their cadence compared with when they ran with their typical cadence. They also exhibited greater stride-to-stride variability in the magnitude of their hip flexion moments and knee extension moments when they deviated from their typical running cadence (ie, running with either a higher or lower cadence). These differences suggest that runners could alter their cadence throughout a run in an attempt to limit overly repetitive localized tissue stresses.

A proposed computer vision model for running gait assessment

Running gait assessment is critical in performance optimization and injury prevention. Traditional approaches to running gait assessment are inhibited by unnatural running environments (e.g., indoor lab), varied assessor (i.e., subjective experience) and high costs with traditional reference standard equipment. Thus, development of valid, reproduceable and low-cost approaches are key. Use of wearables such as inertial measurement units have shown promise but despite their flexible use in any environment and reduced cost, they often retain complexities such as connectivity to mobile platforms and stringent attachment protocols. Here, we propose a non-wearable camera-based approach to running gait assessment, focusing on identification of initial contact events within a runner's stride. We investigated different artificial intelligence and object tracking approaches to determine the optimal methodology. A cohort of 40 healthy runners were video recorded (240FPS, multi-angle) during 2-minute running bouts on a treadmill. Validation of the proposed approach is obtained from comparison to manually labelled videos. The computing vision approach can accurately identify initial contact events (ICC(2,1) = 0.902).

More people more active, but there is a counter site. Novice athletes are at highest risk of injury in a large population-based retrospective cross-sectional study

Objectives

To evaluate whether in fitness-related activities and recreational running over time, there is an increase in the number of novice sports athletes and whether these novice athletes have an increased injury rate compared with their experienced counterparts.

Methods

Data were collected from a large population-based retrospective cross-sectional study, ‘Injuries and Physical Activity in the Netherlands’ (IPAN). Athletes aged ≥18 years were included. We used descriptive statistics to describe the characteristics of athletes and their injuries. The number of athletes and injuries were calculated for each year and, where applicable, for each sport separately. The injury incidence rate was expressed as the number of injuries per 1000 hours of exposure. Logistic regression analyses were performed with non-extrapolated data to analyse the differences in injury risk for novice and experienced athletes included in this study, separate for fitness-related activities and running.

Results

Over the 5 years, 9209 fitness athletes reported 370 fitness-related injuries, 5426 runners reported 537 running-related injuries. Weighted data showed that, in 2010–2014, the inflow of novice fitness athletes slightly decreased, whereas the inflow of novice runners slightly increased. In each year, injury risk was higher in novice athletes compared with experienced athletes for both fitness-related activities and running. The injury incidence rates in running are much higher than in fitness-related activities.

Conclusions

Over the years 2010–2014, the absolute number of novice athletes in fitness-related activities and running together increased. Although most injuries occurred in experienced athletes, injury risk was higher in novice athletes in both sports.

Consequences and Prognosis of Running-Related Knee Injuries Among Recreational Runners

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the consequences and prognostic factors of running-related knee injuries (RRKIs) among recreational runners.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

This study is part of a randomized-controlled trial (RCT) on running injury prevention among recreational runners. At baseline during registration for a running event (5-42 km), demographic and training variables were collected. Participants who reported a new RRKI during follow-up were sent a knee-specific questionnaire at 16 months (range 11.7-18.6) after baseline.

PARTICIPANTS

One hundred thirty-eight runners who reported a new RRKI during the RCT on injury prevention responded to the knee-specific questionnaire.

ASSESSMENT OF RISK FACTORS

To determine the association between potential prognostic factors and time to recovery of an RRKI, a Cox regression analysis was performed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Time to recovery and prognostic factors of RRKIs.

RESULTS

At 16 months after registration, 71.0% of the participants reported full recovery, with a median time to recovery of 8.0 weeks. Most participants reported iliotibial band syndrome (23.2%) or osteoarthritis (OA)/degenerative meniscopathy (23.2%) as cause of their injury. Male sex was associated with a shorter time to recovery [hazard ratio (HR) 1.84; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.14-2.97], while suffering knee OA was associated with a longer time to recovery (HR 0.17; 95% CI, 0.06-0.46).

CONCLUSIONS

Nonrecovered participants adjusted running speed more often and had knee imaging more often than recovered participants. At follow-up, one-third of the participants were not recovered. This emphasizes the need for injury prevention programs for runners. More knowledge on the role of running in knee OA seems important, given the high number of participants with knee OA symptoms.

'I JUST WANT TO RUN': how recreational runners perceive and deal with injuries

Running injuries impact the health gains achieved through running and are linked to drop-out from this otherwise healthy activity. The need for effective prevention is apparent, however, implementation of preventive measures implies a change in runners’ behaviour. This exploratory qualitative study aimed to explore Dutch recreational runners’ perception on injuries, injury occurrence and prevention. An interpretative paradigm underpins this study. We conducted 12 individual semistructured interviews with male (n=6) and female runners (n=6). Through a constant comparative data analysis, we developed a conceptual model to illustrate the final product of the analysis and represent the main themes’ connection. We present a framework that describes the pathway from load to injury and the self-regulatory process controlling this pathway. Runners mentioned that pain is not necessarily an injury, and they usually continue running. Once complaints become unmanageable and limit the runner’s ability to participate, an injury was perceived. Based on our outcomes, we recommend that preventive strategies focus on the self-regulation by which runners manage their complaints and injuries—providing information, advice and programmes that support the runner to make well-informed, effective decisions.

A systematic review of running-related musculoskeletal injuries in runners

OBJECTIVE

Running-related musculoskeletal injuries (RRMIs), especially stemming from overuse, frequently occur in runners. This study aimed to systematically review the literature and determine the incidence and prevalence proportion of RRMIs by anatomic location and specific pathology.

METHODS

An electronic database search with no date beginning restrictions was performed in SPORTDiscus, PubMed, and MEDLINE up to June 2020. Prospective studies were used to find the anatomic location and the incidence proportion of each RRMI, whereas retrospective or cross-sectional studies were used to find the prevalence proportion of each RRMI. A separate analysis for ultramarathon runners was performed.

RESULTS

The overall injury incidence and prevalence were 40.2% ± 18.8% and 44.6% ± 18.4% (mean ± SD), respectively. The knee, ankle, and lower leg accounted for the highest proportion of injury incidence, whereas the knee, lower leg, and foot/toes had the highest proportion of injury prevalence. Achilles tendinopathy (10.3%), medial tibial stress syndrome (9.4%), patellofemoral pain syndrome (6.3%), plantar fasciitis (6.1%), and ankle sprains (5.8%) accounted for the highest proportion of injury incidence, whereas patellofemoral pain syndrome (16.7%), medial tibial stress syndrome (9.1%), plantar fasciitis (7.9%), iliotibial band syndrome (7.9%), and Achilles tendinopathy (6.6%) had the highest proportion of injury prevalence. The ankle (34.5%), knee (28.1%), and lower leg (12.9%) were the 3 most frequently injured sites among ultramarathoners.

CONCLUSION

The injury incidence proportions by anatomic location between ultramarathoners and non-ultramarathoners were not significantly different (p = 0.798). The pathologies with the highest incidence proportion of injuries were anterior compartment tendinopathy (19.4%), patellofemoral pain syndrome (15.8%), and Achilles tendinopathy (13.7%). The interpretation of epidemiological data in RRMIs is limited due to several methodological issues encountered.

Factors Associated With Half- and Full-Marathon Race-Related Injuries: A 3-Year Review

OBJECTIVE

To better evaluate the relationships between training, demographics, and injury, this study sought to define race-related injury risk factors for half- and full-marathon runners.

DESIGN

This 3-year, observational cross-sectional study included adults who participated in a half or full marathon. Prerace and 2-week postrace surveys collected data on demographics, training factors, and injuries.

SETTING

This study took place during a nationally recognized marathon affiliated with a local hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Runners were recruited during the Expo in the days before the race. Postrace surveys were returned by 1043 half marathoners and 624 full marathoners (response rate, 83%).

INTERVENTIONS

This was an observational study; independent variables included demographic data and race year.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

The primary outcome was race-related injury that occurred during the race or within 2 weeks after the race.

RESULTS

Race-related injuries were reported by 24% of half marathoners and 30% of full marathoners. For half and full marathoners, respectively, significant factors for injuries were previous injury, lower peak weekly training mileage, and lower weekly mileage before race training. Factors significant for only half-marathon injuries were younger age, female sex, shorter distance of longest training run, and no formal training program. Factors significant for only full-marathon injuries were higher body mass index, fewer days running per week, and fewer years of running experience.

CONCLUSIONS

Previous running injuries, undertraining, and inexperience increased race-related injury risk; women had higher risk than men. Decreased risk of injury was associated with training loads of greater than 23 miles/week for half marathoners and 40 miles/week for full marathoners.

Use of wearable sensors to identify biomechanical alterations in runners with Exercise-Related lower leg pain

Exercise-related lower leg pain (ERLLP) is one of the most prevalent running-related injuries, however little is known about injured runners' mechanics during outdoor running. Establishing biomechanical alterations among ERLLP runners would help guide clinical interventions. Therefore, we sought to a) identify defining biomechanical features among ERLLP runners compared to healthy runners during outdoor running, and b) identify biomechanical thresholds to generate objective gait-training recommendations. Thirty-two ERLLP (13 M, age: 21 ± 5 years, BMI: 22.69 ± 2.25 kg/m²) and 32 healthy runners (13 M, age: 23 ± 6 years, BMI: 22.33 ± 3.20 kg/m²) were assessed using wearable sensors during one week of typical outdoor training. Step-by-step data were extracted to assess kinetic, kinematic, and spatiotemporal measures. Preliminary feature extraction analyses were conducted to determine key biomechanical differences between healthy and ERLLP groups. Analyses of covariance (ANCOVA) and variability assessments were used compare groups on the identified features. Participants were split into 3 pace bands, and mean differences across groups were calculated to establish biomechanical thresholds. Contact time was the key differentiating feature for ERRLP runners. ANCOVA assessments reflected that the ERLLP group had increased contact time (Mean Difference [95% Confidence Interval] = 8 ms [6.9,9.1], p < .001), and approximate entropy analyses reflected greater contact time variability. Contact time differences were dependent upon running pace, with larger between-group differences being exhibited at faster paces. In all, ERLLP runners demonstrated longer contact time than healthy runners during outdoor training. Clinicians should consider contact time when assessing and treating these ERLLP runner patients.

Surface Shape of the Calcaneal Tuberosity and the Occurrence of Retrocalcaneal Bursitis among Runners

Purpose: The aim of the study was to establish the relationship between the shape of the calcaneal tuberosity (flat, stepped, rounded, normal) and the probability that retrocalcaneal bursitis among people who train running regularly. Methods: The study included a group of 30 runners who suffered from retrocalcaneal bursitis in the past, and 30 people who never had symptoms of this disease. The study was based on a diagnostic survey, as well as on clinical examination. The surface of the calcaneal tuberosity and the slope of the calcaneus were assessed using X-rays. The mobility of the bursa, its surface size, the thickness of the Achilles tendon and its attachment rate were established during an ultrasound examination. Results: Flat surface of the calcaneal tuberosity increases fourfold the risk of suffering from retrocalcaneal bursitis (OR = 4.3). The people whose calcaneus slope is above 25° are at increased risk of suffering from such an inflammation compared with the people whose calcaneus bone is more horizontal (OR = 2.8). The analysis shows that the thickness of the Achilles tendon (p = 0.001), the surface size of the bursa (p = 0.009), as well as the flat surface of the calcaneal tuberosity (p = 0.008) are strongly associated with the occurrence of retrocalcaneal bursitis. Conclusions: The flat shape of the calcaneal tuberosity increases the risk of bursitis. The risk of inflammation is higher when the Achilles tendon is thicker and the surface of the bursa is smaller than normal.

How Do Runners Experience Personalization of Their Training Scheme: The Inspirun E-Coach?

Among runners, there is a high drop-out rate due to injuries and loss of motivation. These runners often lack personalized guidance and support. While there is much potential for sports apps to act as (e-)coaches to help these runners to avoid injuries, set goals, and maintain good intentions, most available running apps primarily focus on persuasive design features like monitoring, they offer few or no features that support personalized guidance (e.g., personalized training schemes). Therefore, we give a detailed description of the working mechanism of Inspirun e-Coach app and on how this app uses a personalized coaching approach with automatic adaptation of training schemes based on biofeedback and GPS-data. We also share insights into how end-users experience this working mechanism. The primary conclusion of this study is that the working mechanism (if provided with accurate data) automatically adapts training sessions to the runners' physical workload and stimulates runners' goal perception, motivation, and experienced personalization. With this mechanism, we attempted to make optimal use of the potential of wearable technology to support the large group of novice or less experienced runners and that by providing insight in our working mechanisms, it can be applied in other technologies, wearables, and types of sports.

Injury incidence and risk factors: a cohort study of 706 8-km or 16-km recreational runners

Objectives

To report (1) the injury incidence in recreational runners in preparation for a 8-km or 16-km running event and (2) which factors were associated with an increased injury risk.

Methods

Prospective cohort study in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Participants (n=5327) received a baseline survey to determine event distance (8 km or 16 km), main sport, running experience, previous injuries, recent overuse injuries and personal characteristics. Three days after the race, they received a follow-up survey to determine duration of training period, running distance per week, training hours, injuries during preparation and use of technology. Univariate and multivariate regression models were applied to examine potential risk factors for injuries.

Results

1304 (24.5%) participants completed both surveys. After excluding participants with current health problems, no signed informed consent, missing or incorrect data, we included 706 (13.3%) participants. In total, 142 participants (20.1%) reported an injury during preparation for the event. Univariate analyses (OR: 1.7, 95% CI 1.1 to 2.4) and multivariate analyses (OR: 1.7, 95% CI 1.1 to 2.5) showed that injury history was a significant risk factor for running injuries (Nagelkerke R-square=0.06).

Conclusion

An injury incidence for recreational runners in preparation for a running event was 20%. A previous injury was the only significant risk factor for running-related injuries.