Are changes in running economy associated with changes in performance in runners? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Effects of a Regular Endurance Training Program on Running Economy and Biomechanics in Runners

A regular endurance training program may elicit different adaptations compared to an isolated training method. In this study, we analyzed the effects of 8 weeks of a regular endurance training program on running economy (RE), particularly neuromuscular and biomechanical parameters, in runners of different athletic abilities. Twenty-four male runners were divided into two groups: well-trained (n=12) and recreational (n=12). Both groups completed a 4-min running bout at 13 and 17 km·h-1, respectively, for the recreational and well-trained group, and a 5-jump plyometric test pre-post intervention. During the training program, participants completed low-intensity continuous sessions, high-intensity interval training sessions, and auxiliary strength training sessions. RE, measured as oxygen cost and energy cost, decreased by 6.15% (p=0.006) and 5.11% (p=0.043), respectively, in the well-trained group. In the recreational group, energy cost of running, respiratory exchange ratio, and leg stiffness decreased by 5.08% (p=0.035), 7.61% (p=0.003), and 10.59% (p=0.017), respectively, while ground contact time increased by 3.34% (p=0.012). The maximum height of the 5-jump plyometric test decreased by 4.55% (p=0.018) in the recreational group. We suggest that 8 weeks of regular endurance training leads to an improvement of ~5% in RE in recreational and well-trained runners with different physiological adaptations between groups and few changes in biomechanical and neuromuscular parameters only in recreational runners.

Correlation between Cardiopulmonary Indices and Running Performance in a 14.5 km Endurance Running Event

BACKGROUND

Running is a common recreational activity, and the number of long-distance-race participants is continuously growing. It is well-established that regular physical activity can prevent and manage non-communicable diseases and benefit public health. Training for a long-distance race requires development of specific aerobic abilities and should generate the desired race performance. The purpose of this study was to support the training design and motivation of recreational endurance runners, by investigating whether a 14.5 km race performance of long-distance runners correlates with their cardiopulmonary indices measured in the laboratory.

METHODS

To examine the relationships of a 14.5 km running performance with the cardiopulmonary parameters of amateur runners, a cross-sectional study design was applied. Fifteen (eleven men and four women) recreational long-distance runners (aged 41.3 ± 9.2 years) from Northern Greece were included in the study and were evaluated in the laboratory within one week before an endurance running race-the 14.5 km Philip Road race, in Greece. The laboratory-based examinations of the athletes consisted of a comprehensive medical pre-participation screening and maximal cardiopulmonary exercise testing.

RESULTS

The results showed that the 14.5 km race performance time (73.8 ± 9.7 min) significantly correlated with the cardiopulmonary-exercise-testing speed-related indices at specific submaximal and maximal workloads (p < 0.01, p < 0.05), while the cardiopulmonary indices of oxygen uptake did not reliably predict race running time (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

There is a better correlation of the 14.5 km running performance of recreational long-distance runners with the cardiopulmonary-exercise-testing speed-related indices at specific workloads than with the indices of oxygen uptake, running economy or respiratory economy. When preparing a training strategy, amateur long-distance runners should mostly rely on specific running-speed-related laboratory data rather than on oxygen-uptake values.

Does orthotics use improve comfort, speed and injury rate during running? Preliminary analysis of a randomised control trial

BACKGROUND

Evidence regarding the effectiveness of using orthotics in improving comfort, increasing running speed and helping to reduce injury rate during running is limited and mixed. Alongside the increasing popularity of running is the increasing rate of running-related injuries (RRIs). Further research into whether orthotics could be used to help reduce RRIs would be highly beneficial for those affected. Additionally, there is a need to clarify whether orthotics use increases comfort during running and helps improve running speed.

AIM

To investigate whether running with Aetrex Orthotics improves comfort and performance and reduces injury whilst running.

METHODS

Runners were recruited on a voluntary basis if they were 18 or older with no serious health conditions, ongoing foot pain or deformity, previous foot surgery in their lifetime or any surgery in the past 6 mo. Participants were randomly assigned to either an intervention group or a control group. All participants were asked to complete runs and provide quantitative data regarding comfort during running, running time and distance, and any RRIs over an 8-wk study period. Participants in the intervention group ran with Aetrex L700 Speed Orthotics, whilst participants in the control group ran without orthotics. Other than the addition of orthotics for participants in the intervention group, all participants were asked to run as they usually would. This report presents preliminary data from the first 47 participants recruited for this study. Running speed was calculated from running distance and time and given in miles per hour. For each outcome variable, the mean for each group, effect size and 95% confidence interval were calculated, and a t-test was performed to determine if between-group differences were statistically significant.

RESULTS

Data for all three primary outcomes was provided from a total of 254 runs by the 23 participants in the intervention group and a total of 289 runs by the 24 participants in the control group. Participants in the intervention group reported higher comfort scores (8.00 ± 1.41 vs 6.96 ± 2.03, P ≤ 0.0001), faster running speeds (6.27 ± 1.03 vs 6.00 ± 1.54, P = 0.013), and lower RRI rates (0.70 ± 1.01 vs 1.21 ± 1.53, P = 0.18) than those in the control group. These findings were statistically significant for comfort and running speed but not for RRI rate, with statistical significance considered if P < 0.05. No adjustments were made for group differences in age, gender, tendency for RRIs or usual running speed.

CONCLUSION

This preliminary report provides evidence for orthotics use in increasing comfort levels and running speed, but no significant difference in RRI rate.