The effect of saddle setback and cycling intensity on saddle pressures and comfort in male and female recreational cyclists

Cycling is a recreational activity that helps to prevent different diseases. The practice of this popular worldwide sport requires the cyclist to maintain a particular posture in contact with the pedals, handlebars, and saddle for long periods of time. Therefore, the study of the pressure exerted on the saddle is of great importance as it is directly related to the reduction of perineal injuries and pathologies. The present research aims to study the effect on comfort and saddle pressures when performing a cycloergometer test using 3 saddle positions: own setback position (P1), forward [-10% (P2)], backward [+10% (P3)] at two exercise intensities (Ventilatory Threshold: VT1 and VT2). 34 amateur cyclists (14 women, 20 men) were analysed. The results showed that comfort was significantly reduced in P3 (p < 0.01) and significantly increased for some items in the VT1 condition and for men in P1 regarding overall comfort (p < 0.01, ES = 0.105). In addition, the average and maximum pressure in the pubic region were significantly higher at P3 (p < 0.001) and men show higher values for average pressure compared to women (p = 0.006, ES = 0.235). In conclusion, backward saddle setback positions increase pressure and discomfort to recreational cyclists in comparison with the forward and own setback position, which could increase the risk of injury.

Pain and body position on the bicycle in competitive and recreational road cyclists: A retrospective study

This study compared the presence of pain in recreational and competitive road cyclists and body position on the bicycle between cyclists with and without pain. Seventy-one cyclists completed a survey reporting existing cycling-related sites of pain and comfort. Static sagittal and frontal plane images were taken to analyse body position on the bicycle. Participants were separated into recreational and competitive road cycling groups, and further into cyclists reporting pain in the upper body, low back, buttocks/hips and knees for comparison with cyclists without pain. A logistic regression model investigated possible predictors of pain whilst cycling. Pain was present in 67% of recreational and 70% of competitive cyclists whilst comfort was reported by 81% of recreational and 75% of competitive cyclists. Trivial to moderate non-significant differences were observed for body position on the bicycle between cyclists with and without pain, and between cyclists with and without pain in the upper body, low back, buttocks/hips and knees. The predictive logistic model was not significant (p = 0.07) with a model fit predicted by McFadden R² of 0.07. Given most cyclists reported both pain and comfort, comfort is probably not a good predictor of overuse injury risk.

Methods to determine saddle height in cycling and implications of changes in saddle height in performance and injury risk: A systematic review

The objective of this systematic review was to assess the methods to determine bicycle saddle height and the effects of saddle height on cycling performance and injury risk outcomes. The key motivator of this review was to update and expand the finding reported by a previous narrative review published in 2011. The literature search included all documents from the following databases: Medline, Scopus, CINAHL, OVID and Google Scholar. Studies were screened against the Appraisal tool for Cross-sectional Studies to assess methodological quality and risk of bias. After screening the initial 29,398 articles identified, full-text screening was performed on 66 studies with 41 of these included in the systematic review. Strong evidence suggests that saddle height should be configured using dynamic measurements of the knee angle, and limb kinematics is influenced by changes in saddle height. However, moderate evidence suggests that changes in saddle height less than 4% of the leg length results in trivial to small changes in lower limb loads, and no effect on oxygen uptake and efficiency. It is also possible to state that there is limited evidence on the effects from changes in saddle height on supramaximal cycling performance or injury risk.

Discomfort, pain and fatigue levels of 160 cyclists after a kinematic bike-fitting method: an experimental study

Objective

To analyse rider’s subjective responses after a standardised bicycle ergonomic adjustment method.

Methods

Experimental study of 160 healthy, amateur mountain bikers analysed previously and 30 days after a bike-fitting session. The main outcome measures were subjective comfort level (Feeling Scale, FEEL), fatigue (OMINI Scale) and pain (Visual Analogue Scale, VAS).

Results

All variables demonstrated statistical significance between groups pre and post bike-fit session (p<0001). FEEL, OMNI and VAS-knee demonstrated large effect sizes (d=1.30; d=1.39 and d=0.86, respectively). VAS-hands, VAS-neck and VAS-back indicated moderate effect size (d=0.58; d=0.52 and d=0.43, respectively). VAS-groin and VAS-ankle indicated a small size effect (d=0.46 and d=0.43, respectively).

Conclusions

Overall discomfort, fatigue and pain in healthy mountain biker adults improved according to all three scales. The major improvements in pain levels were detected on the knee, hands, back and neck compared with presession values. Groin and ankle pain had smaller improvements but were still significant. Future clinical trials should address the bias effects of this experimental study.