In training for a marathon: Runners and running-related injury prevention

The Dogma of Running Injuries: Perceptions of Adolescent and Adult Runners

CONTEXT

Adults perceive certain factors to increase or decrease the risk of sustaining running-related injuries, but many of their perceptions are not supported by research. Little is known about the perceptions that adolescent runners hold. Investigating perceptions for adolescent runners is needed to assist in the development of future injury educational materials, as these resources may need to be tailored differently for adolescents and adults.

OBJECTIVE

To identify factors that adolescent runners perceive as risk or protective factors for running-related injuries and to compare these perceptions with those of adult runners.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Online survey.

PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS

We surveyed 302 adolescent (164 females, 138 males; age = 16.0 ± 1.4 years [range, 12-19 years]) and 357 adult runners (197 women, 160 men; age = 40.7 ± 11.8 years [range, 20-77 years]).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Participants completed a survey with questions about whether factors related to training habits, footwear, biomechanics, strength, stretching, or nutrition influence the risk of sustaining a running-related injury. If ≥75% of adolescents indicated that a factor increases or decreases the risk of sustaining an injury, we considered that factor to be a perceived risk or protective factor, respectively. We also performed Fisher's exact test to compare the proportion of adolescent and adult runners who responded with "increase," "decrease," "neither increase or decrease," or "I don't know" to each question.

RESULTS

Adolescent runners perceived training habits, footwear, biomechanics, strength, stretching, and nutrition to increase or decrease the risk of sustaining a running-related injury. A larger proportion of adolescents than adults perceived that more footwear cushioning and stretching decrease injury risk, but a smaller proportion perceived that overtraining increases injury risk and strength decreases injury risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Differences in perceptions exist between adolescent and adult runners, and future educational materials and research questions may need to be tailored for different running populations.

An Investigation Into the Measurement of Injury Severity in Running-Related Injury Research: A Scoping Review

Understanding injury severity is essential to inform injury prevention practice. The aims of this scoping review were to investigate how running-related injury (RRI) severity is measured, compare how it differs across studies, and examine whether it influences study outcomes (i.e., injury rates and risk factor identification). This scoping review was prospectively registered with Open Science Framework. A systematic electronic search was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, SPORTDiscuss, MEDLINE, and Web of Science databases. Included studies were published in English between January 1980 and December 2023, investigated RRIs in adult running populations, and included a measure of injury severity. Results were extracted and collated. Sixty-six studies were included. Two predominant primary criteria are used to define injury severity: the extent of the effect on running and/or the extent of the physical description. When secondary definition criteria are considered, 13 variations of injury severity measurement are used. Two approaches are used to grade injury severity: a categorization approach or a continuous numerical scale. Overall, the measurement of RRI severity is relatively inconsistent across studies. Less than half of studies report incidence rates per level of injury severity, while none report specific risk factors across levels, making it difficult to determine if the approach to measuring injury severity influences these study outcomes. This lack of information is possibly contributing to inconsistent rates of RRIs reported, and the lack of clarity on risk factors.

Can running-related injuries be prevented through an online behavioural intervention in adult novice runners? Results of a randomised controlled trial

Objective

To evaluate the effectiveness of the Runfitcheck on time until the onset of a new running-related injury (RRI) among adult novice runners.

Methods

A three-arm randomised controlled trial was conducted over 7 months. Adult novice runners completed a baseline online questionnaire on their characteristics, running activity, RRIs and injury preventive behaviour. Runners were randomly allocated to one of two intervention groups or the control group (n=238). One intervention group obtained access to the Runfitcheck (n=252), an online intervention to encourage injury preventive behaviour, and was fortnightly promoted to use Runfitcheck; the other intervention group (n=251) was directed towards the Runfitcheck once. Runners were followed for 4 months, not all starting at the same time over 7 months. The main outcome measure was time to a new RRI using the Oslo Sports Trauma Research Centre Overuse Injury Questionnaire, and was analysed with survival analysis Cox regression. Generalised estimating equations (GEE) were used to gain insight into the effectiveness of the Runfitcheck.

Results

The time to the occurrence of the first RRI did not differ between the study groups (Wald χ²=0.893). GEE analysis showed no difference in the risk of a new RRI in the group that was referred to the Runfitcheck once (OR 1.22, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.74) nor in the active approach group (OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.45) compared with the control group. Furthermore, the onset of the new RRIs did not change over time (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.01).

Conclusions

The online intervention Runfitcheck was ineffective in reducing the instantaneous risk of new RRIs in adult novice runners. More research is needed to determine how injuries in novice runners can be prevented.

Trial registration number

Dutch Trial Registry (ID: NL7823).

Training Behaviors and Periodization Outline of Omnivorous, Vegetarian, and Vegan Recreational Runners (Part A)-Results from the NURMI Study (Step 2)

Runners train for long-distance competitions based on underlying motivations, which may be similar to individual dietary motivations (e.g., well-being and performance). Fundamental training differences may arise in recreational runners following different diet types (omnivore, vegetarian, vegan) considering possible motive variations. Following a cross-sectional design, distance runners completed a survey (online), including a thorough assessment of training behaviors with generic training details and periodization specifics in three phases: 1. an intermediary and rebound stage, 2. a main preparatory stage, and 3. a main event stage (tapering or interim event level/s). Kruskal-Wallis and chi-squared tests were used in the statistical analysis. A total of 245 fit recreational runners following omnivore (n = 109), vegetarian (n = 45), and vegan diets (n = 91) were included. Significant differences in the initial running motivation were found across dietary subgroups (p = 0.033) as well as for current motivations (p = 0.038), with vegetarians being the least health motivated (27% and 9%, respectively). No differences in each of the specific periods were found between diet types across the outline (p > 0.05). The present evidence shows that there is a lack of fundamental training differences based on recreational runners following different generic types of diets. The results of the present investigation may be especially relevant for future studies on safety, sustainability, and performance-enhancing dietary practices among athletes.

Factors associated with injuries in first-time marathon runners from the New York City marathon

OBJECTIVES

To determine how baseline characteristics of first-time marathon runners and training patterns are associated with risk of injuries during training and the race.

METHODS

First-time adult marathon runners who were registered for the 2017 New York City Marathon were monitored starting 12 weeks prior to the race. Baseline data collection included demographics and running experience. Running frequency, distance, and injury occurrence were self-reported using online surveys every 2 weeks.

RESULTS

A total of 720 runners participated of which 675 completed the study. There were 64/675 (9.5%) who had major injuries during training or the race that preventing starting or finishing the race. An additional 332 (49.2%) had minor injuries interfering with training and/or affecting race performance. Injury incidence was not significantly different based on age or sex. Runners who completed a half marathon prior to the study were less likely to report getting injured [multivariable odds ratio (OR) 0.40, (0.22, 0.76), p= 0.005]. Runners who averaged <4 training runs per week during the study were less likely to report getting injured compared to those who averaged ≥4 per week [relative risk 1.36, (1.13-1.63), p= 0.001]. Longest training run distance during the study was inversely associated with race-day injury incidence [OR 0.87 (0.81, 0.94), p< 0.001].

CONCLUSION

Injuries are common among first-time marathon runners. We found that risk of injury during training was associated with lack of half marathon experience and averaging ≥4 training runs per week. Longer training runs were associated with a lower incidence of race-day injuries. These results can inform the development of targeted injury-prevention interventions.

Effects of standing and walking on plantar pressure distribution in recreational runners before and after long-distance running

With marathon-running grew in popularity, the effect of long-distance running on plantar pressure has been more attractive. It has been proposed that long-distance running influences the deviation in the center of pressure (COP) during standing and the changes to plantar pressure during walking. The objective of this study was to observe the effects on the COP motion amplitude of static standing and the plantar pressure distribution of walking after long-distance running. The influence of a 10-km run on changes to plantar pressure was assessed during standing and walking. Plantar pressure was measured before and immediately after running. In the study, seven males and five females participated in barefoot tests of static standing and dynamic walking. In the static standing tests, COP was measured under the following four ordered conditions: (1) bipedal, eyes open, standing; (2) bipedal, eyes closed, standing; (3) unipedal, eyes open, standing and (4) unipedal, eyes closed, standing. Under each condition, the data was collected while a stable standing posture for 10 s. In the dynamic walking tests, the contact duration and plantar pressure were recorded. The standing tests results revealed no significant differences between males and females while slight differences before vs. after running. Running for a single time had no effect on COP deviation during standing. The walking tests results revealed an initial landing on the lateral heel. After landing on the lateral heel, the females quickly transferred to the medial heel. The movement of the pressure to the medial heel was slower in males than females. After running, the pressure of females was more inward, while that of males was more outward under the metatarsal zones in the propulsion phase.

The Epidemiology, Risk Factors, and Nonsurgical Treatment of Injuries Related to Endurance Running

ABSTRACT

Running is a popular form of exercise that is easily accessible to various populations; endurance running, defined as distances beyond 5 km, continues to grow within the sport. Endurance running-related injuries are common in the lower extremities and are primarily overuse related. A multitude of risk factors for injury exist, including extrinsic factors, such as running distance and frequency, and intrinsic factors, such as biomechanics and nutrition status. Training and rehabilitation techniques vary with a general focus on strengthening and gradual increase in activity, but evidence is mixed, and it is difficult to generalize programs across different running populations. Management of specific running groups, including youth runners, is an area in which additional research is needed. New treatments, such as orthobiologics and wearable technology, have promising potential to optimize performance and recovery and minimize injury. However, they need to be further evaluated with high-quality studies.

Lower extremity compression garments use by athletes: why, how often, and perceived benefit

Background

Studies on the benefits of lower extremity compression garments (CGs) have focused on their effects on post-exercise recovery and performance improvement. Less is known about why athletes actually use CGs, the frequency with which they use them, and perceived benefits from using CGs. The purpose of this study was to investigate which athletes use CGs, why athletes use CGs, when CGs are worn by athletes, and, in case of an injury or injury prevention, for which injuries CGs are used.

Methods

This cross-sectional study involved 512 athletes who used lower extremity CGs. Athletes completed a questionnaire on the type of CGs they used, and when and why they used them. They also reported their sports participation, past and current sports injuries, and the perceived benefits of using CGs.

Results

88.1% (n=451) of the athletes were endurance athletes and 11.9% (n=61) were non-endurance athletes. Endurance and non-endurance athletes reported running (84.7%, n=382) and obstacle course racing (24.6%, n=15) the most frequently as primary sports, respectively. The most-used CG was the compression sock (59.2%, n=303). In total, 47.5% (n=246) of the athletes used a CG primarily to prevent re-injury and 14.5% (n=74) to reduce symptoms of a current sports injury. Other primary reported aims were primary prevention (13.6%), post-exercise recovery (14.3%), sports performance improvement (8.8%), and to look good (0.2%). The point prevalence of past and current sports injuries among all athletes was 84.2 and 20.2%, respectively. The most common current sports injuries were shin and calf injuries. Many athletes “always” or “often” used their CGs during training (56.8%, n=279) and competitions (72.9%, n=264). Furthermore, almost 90% of the athletes that aimed to prevent re-injury by using CGs reported that CGs contributed to secondary injury prevention.

Conclusion

88% of the CG-users were endurance athletes, of which 85% were runners. All athletes mainly used CGs to prevent injury recurrence, but also to reduce symptoms of a current sports injury. A majority of the athletes reported positive perceived effects from the CGs. CGs were used more during than after sports participation.

Sex-Specific Differences in Running Injuries: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression

BACKGROUND

Running is a popular sport with high injury rates. Although risk factors have intensively been investigated, synthesized knowledge about the differences in injury rates of female and male runners is scarce.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically investigate the differences in injury rates and characteristics between female and male runners.

METHODS

Database searches (PubMed, Web of Science, PEDro, SPORTDiscus) were conducted according to PRISMA guidelines using the keywords "running AND injur*". Prospective studies reporting running related injury rates for both sexes were included. A random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool the risk ratios (RR) for the occurrence of injuries in female vs. male runners. Potential moderators (effect modifiers) were analysed using meta-regression.

RESULTS

After removal of duplicates, 12,215 articles were screened. Thirty-eight studies were included and the OR of 31 could be pooled in the quantitative analysis. The overall injury rate was 20.8 (95% CI 19.9-21.7) injuries per 100 female runners and 20.4 (95% CI 19.7-21.1) injuries per 100 male runners. Meta-analysis revealed no differences between sexes for overall injuries reported per 100 runners (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.90-1.10, n = 24) and per hours or athlete exposure (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.69-1.27, n = 6). Female sex was associated with a more frequent occurrence of bone stress injury (RR (for males) 0.52, 95% CI 0.36-0.76, n = 5) while male runners had higher risk for Achilles tendinopathies (RR 1. 86, 95% CI 1.25-2.79, n = 2). Meta-regression showed an association between a higher injury risk and competition distances of 10 km and shorter in female runners (RR 1.08, 95% CI 1.00-1.69).

CONCLUSION

Differences between female and male runners in specific injury diagnoses should be considered in the development of individualised and sex-specific prevention and rehabilitation strategies to manage running-related injuries.

Daily Step Counts from the First Thailand National Steps Challenge in 2020: A Cross-Sectional Study

Thailand’s first national steps challenge has been implemented in 2020 with the goal to raise the level of physical activity nationwide by monitoring achievements through a smartphone application. This study examined the daily step counts of participants in the first national steps challenge. Six data points from 186,653 valid participants were retrieved and analyzed in five periods using Poisson regression. The mean daily steps peaked at 3196 in Period 1, and steadily dropped to 1205 in Period 5. The daily steps per period were analyzed using the participants’ characteristics, such as the type of participant, sex, age, body mass index, and area of residence. The overall mean daily steps of the participants meant physical activity was far below the recommended level and tended to drop in later periods. The general population achieved significantly higher mean daily steps than public health officers or village health volunteers (24.0% by multivariate analysis). Participants who were female, younger (<45 years), obese (body mass index > 30), and living in rural areas had fewer mean daily steps (13.8%, 44.3%, 12.7%, and 14.7% by multivariate analysis, respectively), with statistical significance. In the future, the national steps challenge should be continuously implemented by counting all steps throughout a day, using more strategies to draw attention and raise motivation, advocating for more participants, as well as reporting the whole day step counts instead of distance.

Common Running Musculoskeletal Injuries and Associated Factors among Recreational Gorge Marathon Runners: An Investigation from 2013 to 2018 Taroko Gorge Marathons

Many studies exist on the incidence and related risk factors of running injuries, such as those obtained during marathons. However, in gorge-terrain marathons, an insufficient number of reports exist in the relevant literature. Therefore, this study aimed to explore the incidence of musculoskeletal injuries occurring in participants in the 2013 to 2018 Taroko Gorge Marathons in Taiwan and the distribution of running injuries and related influencing factors. A total of 718 runners who entered the physiotherapy station presented with records of treatment and injuries and filled out a running-related injury and self-training questionnaire for further statistical analysis. The association between risk factors and injury were evaluated by logistic regression. The injured areas on the lower extremities after the gorge marathon were as follows: 28% in the knees, 20% in the posterior calves, 13% in the thighs, 10% in the ankles, and 8% in the feet. The analysis of injury-related risk factors showed that male athletes demonstrated a higher risk of thigh injury than female athletes (OR = 2.42, p = 0.002). Underweight runners exhibited a higher risk of thigh injury (OR = 3.35, p = 0.006). We conclude that in the gorge marathon the rates of knee, calf, thigh, and foot injuries are significantly increased. Medical professionals, coaches, and runners may use the findings of this study to reduce the potential risk of running injuries in marathons.