Biomechanical effects following footstrike pattern modification using wearable sensors

Enhancing running injury prevention strategies with real-time biofeedback: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The number of runners and the incidence of running-related injuries (RRIs) are on the rise. Real-time biofeedback gait retraining offers a promising approach to RRIs prevention. However, due to the diversity in study designs and reported outcomes, there remains uncertainty regarding the efficacy of different forms of feedback on running gait biomechanics. Three databases: MEDLINE, PUBMED, and SPORTDiscus were searched to identify relevant studies published up to March 2024, yielding 4646 articles for review. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Downs and Black Quality checklist. Primary outcomes, including Peak Tibial Acceleration (PTA), Vertical Average Loading Rate (VALR), and Vertical Instantaneous Loading Rate (VILR), were analysed through meta-analysis. 24 studies met the inclusion criteria and were analysed in this review.17 used visual biofeedback (VB) while 14 chose auditory biofeedback (AB). The meta-analysis revealed a reduction in loading variables both immediately following the intervention and after extended training, with both visual and auditory feedback. Notably, the decrease in loading variables was more pronounced post-training and VB proved to be more effective than AB. Real-time biofeedback interventions are effective in lowering loading variables associated with RRIs. The impact is more substantial with sustained training, and VB outperforms AB in terms of effectiveness.

KeepRunning: A MoCap-Based Rapid Test to Prevent Musculoskeletal Running Injuries

The worldwide popularisation of running as a sport and recreational practice has led to a high rate of musculoskeletal injuries, usually caused by a lack of knowledge about the most suitable running technique for each runner. This running technique is determined by a runner's anthropometric body characteristics, dexterity and skill. Therefore, this study aims to develop a motion capture-based running analysis test on a treadmill called KeepRunning to obtain running patterns rapidly, which will aid coaches and clinicians in assessing changes in running technique considering changes in the study variables. Therefore, a review and proposal of the most representative events and variables of analysis in running was conducted to develop the KeepRunning test. Likewise, the minimal detectable change (MDC) in these variables was obtained using test-retest reliability to demonstrate the reproducibility and viability of the test, as well as the use of MDC as a threshold for future assessments. The test-retest consisted of 32 healthy volunteer athletes with a running training routine of at least 15 km per week repeating the test twice. In each test, clusters of markers were placed on the runners' body segments using elastic bands and the volunteers' movements were captured while running on a treadmill. In this study, reproducibility was defined by the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and MDC, obtaining a mean value of ICC = 0.94 ± 0.05 for all variables and MDC = 2.73 ± 1.16° for the angular kinematic variables. The results obtained in the test-retest reveal that the reproducibility of the test was similar or better than that found in the literature. KeepRunning is a running analysis test that provides data from the involved body segments rapidly and easily interpretable. This data allows clinicians and coaches to objectively provide indications for runners to improve their running technique and avoid possible injury. The proposed test can be used in the future with inertial motion capture and other wearable technologies.

Wearables for Running Gait Analysis: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Running gait assessment has traditionally been performed using subjective observation or expensive laboratory-based objective technologies, such as three-dimensional motion capture or force plates. However, recent developments in wearable devices allow for continuous monitoring and analysis of running mechanics in any environment. Objective measurement of running gait is an important (clinical) tool for injury assessment and provides measures that can be used to enhance performance.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to systematically review the available literature investigating how wearable technology is being used for running gait analysis in adults.

METHODS

A systematic search of the literature was conducted in the following scientific databases: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and SPORTDiscus. Information was extracted from each included article regarding the type of study, participants, protocol, wearable device(s), main outcomes/measures, analysis and key findings.

RESULTS

A total of 131 articles were reviewed: 56 investigated the validity of wearable technology, 22 examined the reliability and 77 focused on applied use. Most studies used inertial measurement units (n = 62) [i.e. a combination of accelerometers, gyroscopes and magnetometers in a single unit] or solely accelerometers (n = 40), with one using gyroscopes alone and 31 using pressure sensors. On average, studies used one wearable device to examine running gait. Wearable locations were distributed among the shank, shoe and waist. The mean number of participants was 26 (± 27), with an average age of 28.3 (± 7.0) years. Most studies took place indoors (n = 93), using a treadmill (n = 62), with the main aims seeking to identify running gait outcomes or investigate the effects of injury, fatigue, intrinsic factors (e.g. age, sex, morphology) or footwear on running gait outcomes. Generally, wearables were found to be valid and reliable tools for assessing running gait compared to reference standards.

CONCLUSIONS

This comprehensive review highlighted that most studies that have examined running gait using wearable sensors have done so with young adult recreational runners, using one inertial measurement unit sensor, with participants running on a treadmill and reporting outcomes of ground contact time, stride length, stride frequency and tibial acceleration. Future studies are required to obtain consensus regarding terminology, protocols for testing validity and the reliability of devices and suitability of gait outcomes.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

CRD42021235527.

Clinical Application of Gait Retraining in the Injured Runner

Despite its positive influence on physical and mental wellbeing, running is associated with a high incidence of musculoskeletal injury. Potential modifiable risk factors for running-related injury have been identified, including running biomechanics. Gait retraining is used to address these biomechanical risk factors in injured runners. While recent systematic reviews of biomechanical risk factors for running-related injury and gait retraining have been conducted, there is a lack of information surrounding the translation of gait retraining for injured runners into clinical settings. Gait retraining studies in patients with patellofemoral pain syndrome have shown a decrease in pain and increase in functionality through increasing cadence, decreasing hip adduction, transitioning to a non-rearfoot strike pattern, increasing forward trunk lean, or a combination of some of these techniques. This literature suggests that gait retraining could be applied to the treatment of other injuries in runners, although there is limited evidence to support this specific to other running-related injuries. Components of successful gait retraining to treat injured runners with running-related injuries are presented.

Review of Real-Time Biomechanical Feedback Systems in Sport and Rehabilitation

Real-time biomechanical feedback (BMF) is a relatively new area of research. The potential of using advanced technology to improve motion skills in sport and accelerate physical rehabilitation has been demonstrated in a number of studies. This paper provides a literature review of BMF systems in sports and rehabilitation. Our motivation was to examine the history of the field to capture its evolution over time, particularly how technologies are used and implemented in BMF systems, and to identify the most recent studies showing novel solutions and remarkable implementations. We searched for papers in three research databases: Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed. The initial search yielded 1167 unique papers. After a rigorous and challenging exclusion process, 144 papers were eventually included in this report. We focused on papers describing applications and systems that implement a complete real-time feedback loop, which must include the use of sensors, real-time processing, and concurrent feedback. A number of research questions were raised, and the papers were studied and evaluated accordingly. We identified different types of physical activities, sensors, modalities, actuators, communications, settings and end users. A subset of the included papers, showing the most perspectives, was reviewed in depth to highlight and present their innovative research approaches and techniques. Real-time BMF has great potential in many areas. In recent years, sensors have been the main focus of these studies, but new types of processing devices, methods, and algorithms, actuators, and communication technologies and protocols will be explored in more depth in the future. This paper presents a broad insight into the field of BMF.

Wearable Technology May Assist in Retraining Foot Strike Patterns in Previously Injured Military Service Members: A Prospective Case Series

A rearfoot strike (RFS) pattern with increased average vertical loading rates (AVLR) while running has been associated with injury. This study evaluated the ability of an instrumented sock, which provides real-time foot strike and cadence audio biofeedback, to transition previously injured military service members from a RFS to a non-rearfoot strike (NRFS) running pattern. Nineteen RFS runners (10 males, 9 females) were instructed to wear the instrumented socks to facilitate a change in foot strike while completing an independent walk-to-run progression and lower extremity exercise program. Kinetic data were collected during treadmill running while foot strike was determined using video analysis at initial (T1), post-intervention (T2), and follow-up (T3) data collections. Nearly all runners (18/19) transitioned to a NRFS pattern following intervention (8 ± 2.4 weeks after the initial visit). Most participants (16/18) maintained the transition at follow-up (5 ± 0.8 weeks after the post-intervention visit). AVLR of the involved and uninvolved limb decreased 29% from initial [54.7 ± 13.2 bodyweights per sec (BW/s) and 55.1 ± 12.7 BW/s] to post-intervention (38.7 ± 10.1 BW/s and 38.9 ± 10.0 BW/s), respectively. This effect persisted 5-weeks later at follow-up, representing an overall 30% reduction on the involved limb and 24% reduction on the uninvolved limb. Cadence increased from the initial to the post-intervention time-point (p = 0.045); however, this effect did not persist at follow-up (p = 0.08). With technology provided feedback from instrumented socks, approximately 90% of participants transitioned to a NRFS pattern, decreased AVLR, reduced stance time and maintained these running adaptations 5-weeks later.

A real-time feedback method to reduce loading rate during running: Effect of combining direct and indirect feedback

Impact loading plays a key role in the pathophysiology of running-related injuries. Providing real-time feedback may be an effective strategy to reduce impact loading; however, it is currently unclear what an effective training method to help runners achieve a habitual low loading rate is. We subjected 20 healthy non-runners to a structured sequence of direct and indirect biofeedback designed to facilitate broader exploration of neuro-mechanical workspace for potential movement solutions (indirect feedback on cadence and foot-strike angle) and to refine and converge upon an optimal sub-set of that space to match the task goal (direct feedback on loading rate). While indirect biofeedback on foot-strike angle yielded a lower impact load than providing direct biofeedback on loading rate, compared to indirect biofeedback on foot-strike angle, providing direct feedback on loading rate statistically increased (+58%, p = 0.007) the range of goal-relevant solutions participants used to lower their impact loading. Results showed that structured feedback was effective in increasing the range of input parameters that match the task goal, hence expanding the size of goal-relevant solutions, which may benefit running performance under changing environmental constraints.