Prospective running assessments among division I cross-country athletes

Biomechanical changes identified during a marathon race among high-school aged runners

BACKGROUND

Despite the increasing popularity of endurance running competitions among adolescent runners, there is currently limited information regarding expected biomechanical changes across the duration of a long-distance running event, and the relationship between young runners' biomechanics and running performance. Wearable technology offers an ecological means to continuously assess runners' biomechanical data during outdoor running competitions.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Do adolescent athletes adopt changes in sensor-derived biomechanics throughout a marathon race, and are there relationships between race performance and biomechanical features among young marathoners?

METHODS

Fourteen high-school aged runners (9 M, 5 F; age: 16 ± 1 years, height: 170.8 ± 7.5 cm; mass: 63.6 ± 9.4 kg) wore lace-mounted sensors to record step-by-step biomechanics during a marathon race. Official race segment completion times were extracted across 5 race segments (5-K, 15-K, Half Marathon [21.1-K], 35-K, Marathon [42.2-K]). Within-participant repeated measures of covariance (pace) were conducted to assess changes in biomechanics across the race, with Bonferroni post-hoc comparisons. Pearson's r correlations were performed to assess the relationship between race finish times and biomechanics.

RESULTS

Pace was significantly slower (p-range: 0.002-0.005), contact times significantly longer, and stride lengths significantly shorter in the final segment compared to middle segments (p-range: 0.003-0.004). The rate of shock accumulation was significantly higher in the final race segment compared to the first three segments (p-range: 0.001-0.002). Moderate relationships existed between finish times and pace (r = -0.63), stride length (r = -0.62), and contact time (r = 0.51).

SIGNIFICANCE

Adolescent runners altered their gait patterns in the final marathon segment compared to earlier segments. Spatiotemporal measures were moderately correlated with race finish times, suggesting a link between faster run pace, increased stride lengths, and reduced contact time for improved running performance during an endurance race.

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.