SeRUN® study: Development of running profiles using a mixed methods analysis

Definitions and surveillance methods of running-related injuries: A scoping review

Inconsistent and restricted definitions of injury have contributed to limitations in determining injury rates and identifying risk factors for running-related injuries (RRIs). The aim of this scoping review was to investigate the definitions and surveillance methods of RRIs. A systematic electronic search was performed using PubMed, Scopus, SPORTDiscuss, MEDLINE, and Web of Science databases. Included studies were published in English between January 1980 and June 2023 which investigated RRIs in adult running populations, providing a definition for a general RRI. Results were extracted and collated. 204 articles were included. Three primary criteria were used to define RRIs: physical description, effect on training and medical intervention, while three secondary criteria are also associated with definitions: cause/onset of injury, location, and social consequences. Further descriptors and sub-descriptors form these criteria. The use of Boolean operators resulted in nine variations in definitions. Inconsistency is evident among definitions of RRIs. Injury definitions seem to be important for two main reasons: firstly, determining accurate injury rates, and secondly, in research examining risk factors. For the latter, definitions seem to be very limited, only capturing severe injuries and failing to recognise the full development process of RRIs, precluding the identification of conclusive risk factors. A potential two-approach solution is the initial use of a broad definition acting as a gatekeeper for identifying any potential injury, and follow-up with an extensive surveillance tool to capture the specific consequences of the varying severity of RRIs.

Differences in training characteristics of recreational endurance runners by race distance - results from the NURMI Study (Step 2)

Background

Although runner's profiles were previously investigated, information on the training frequency and training distance for short (5 km, 10 km) and long-distance (>21 km) running is absent. The present study aimed to investigate the associations between training routines and exercise habits of recreational endurance runners considering self-reported preferred race distance [10 km, half-marathon (HM), and marathon/ultra-marathon (M/UM)] subgroups.

Methods

This is a cross-sectional study, sampling 154 recreational runners of both sexes. A web survey was used for data collection regarding age, sex, preferred distance (10-km, HM, M/UM), training routines, exercise habits, and periodized training routines. The Chi-square test (Cramer's V) and Kruskal-Wallis test (Eta-Squared η2) with effect sizes were used for comparisons between race distances.

Results

Significant differences were shown for anthropometric, training, and periodization characteristics. Highly significant differences were found between subgroups for the number of sessions, running kilometers, and training hours at all periods and within all four preparation conditions. M/UM runners were training more frequently, for longer durations, and ran greater distances each week.

Conclusion

This finding supports the notion that training habits and periodization characteristics are different for different race distances (10-km, half marathon, marathon, and ultramarathon).

The Running Injury Continuum: A qualitative examination of recreational runners' description and management of injury

INTRODUCTION

A critical step in understanding and preventing running-related injuries (RRIs) is appropriately defining RRIs. Current definitions of RRIs may not represent the full process of injury development, failing to capture lower levels of injury that many athletes continue to train through. Understanding runners' description and management of the injury development process may allow for a more appropriate examination of all levels of injury. This study aimed to examine recreational runners' description and management of the injury development process.

METHODS

A qualitative focus group study was undertaken. Seven semi-structured focus groups with male (n = 13) and female (n = 18) recreational runners took place. Focus groups were audio and video recorded, and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were reflexively thematically analysed. A critical friend approach was taken to data coding. Multiple methods of trustworthiness were executed.

RESULTS

Runners describe injury on a nine-level continuum, ranging from injury-free to career-ending injury. There are lower and higher levels of injury. Each level of injury is described across four categories of descriptors; physical description, outcome (effect on running and daily life), psychological description, and management.

CONCLUSION

The Running Injury Continuum is a tool that can be used for injury surveillance (for healthcare professionals and researchers) and for research investigating RRI risk factors. Healthcare professionals, researchers and coaches must ensure they monitor the development of all levels of RRIs, across all categories of descriptors. Runners need to be educated regarding appropriate self-management strategies for lower level injuries, with access to evidence-based information being a critical management tool.

Domesticating the condition: Design lessons gained from a marathon on how to cope with barriers imposed by type 1 diabetes

Through analytical autoethnographic analysis of marathon preparation, this study examines challenges faced by people with Type 1 Diabetes (T1D) who engage in high-performance sports. Autoethnographer and second-person perspectives (T1D runners, family members, and health providers) were collected through introspective activities (autoethnographic diary and in-depth interviews) to understand the T1D runner's coping experience. Six insights involved in T1D self-management were identified and analyzed with reference to related design tools (prototyping, archetyping and journey mapping). Finally, we conclude with a discussion of how endurance physical activity (PA) such as running helps to "domesticate" T1D, a term coined to reflect the difficulties that T1D presents for PA accomplishment and how T1D runners' experiences give them an opportunity to overcome PA barriers promoting physical culture and enriching further health psychology studies.

Going their own way–male recreational runners and running-related injuries: A qualitative thematic analysis

Objective

Recreational running is one of the most common physical leisure activities worldwide and is associated with high rates of running related injury (RRI). Little is known of the perceptions of male recreational runners regarding the aetiology and management of RRI.

Design

Utilising an interpretive phenomenological analysis framework, qualitative data was gathered from participants via interview, and reflexive thematic analysis was used to develop insights into the experiences and perceptions of the participants in relation to RRI.

Materials and methods

Two focus groups with a total of six (mean age 37.8 ± 9.5 years, 16.5 ± 13.1 years running experience) male recreational runners were used to obtain data regarding their understanding of RRI causation, prevention and management. Interviews were evaluated using a six-phase reflexive thematic analysis approach to generate and interpret themes within the data.

Results

Three themes (Mind, Body and Education) were identified by the analysis as critical to RRI avoidance. Mind refers to the self-understanding and self-management of personal limits required for RRI prevention. Body reflects a degree of physical conditioning necessary for injury free running, while Education indicates an understanding of how to correctly structure a running program. When viewed together these themes can be seen to form an ‘internal locus of injury’ model which highlights the runners’ beliefs that RRI are related to their decisions regarding training and running, and that avoidance of injury lies within their personal control.

Conclusion

Recreational runners rely on self-management, in preference to professional advice, to manage training loads, fitness and RRI. Health care professionals involved with this population may consider the use of online resources, a preferred option of runners, to assist runners to build their knowledge base and support their development to experienced runners.

'I JUST WANT TO RUN': how recreational runners perceive and deal with injuries

Running injuries impact the health gains achieved through running and are linked to drop-out from this otherwise healthy activity. The need for effective prevention is apparent, however, implementation of preventive measures implies a change in runners’ behaviour. This exploratory qualitative study aimed to explore Dutch recreational runners’ perception on injuries, injury occurrence and prevention. An interpretative paradigm underpins this study. We conducted 12 individual semistructured interviews with male (n=6) and female runners (n=6). Through a constant comparative data analysis, we developed a conceptual model to illustrate the final product of the analysis and represent the main themes’ connection. We present a framework that describes the pathway from load to injury and the self-regulatory process controlling this pathway. Runners mentioned that pain is not necessarily an injury, and they usually continue running. Once complaints become unmanageable and limit the runner’s ability to participate, an injury was perceived. Based on our outcomes, we recommend that preventive strategies focus on the self-regulation by which runners manage their complaints and injuries—providing information, advice and programmes that support the runner to make well-informed, effective decisions.

Effect of the Construction of Carbon Fiber Plate Insert to Midsole on Running Performance

In this paper, to investigate the independent effect of the construction of the forefoot carbon-fiber plate inserted to the midsole on running biomechanics and finite element simulation, fifteen male marathon runners were arranged to run across a runway with embedded force plates at two specific running speeds (fast-speed: 4.81 ± 0.32 m/s, slow-speed: 3.97 ± 0.19 m/s) with two different experimental shoes (a segmented forefoot plate construction (SFC), and a full forefoot plate construction (FFC)), simulating the different pressure distributions, energy return, and stiffness during bending in the forefoot region between the SFC and FFC inserted to midsole. Kinetics and joint mechanics were analyzed. The results showed that the footwear with SFC significantly increased the peak metatarsophalangeal joint (MTPJ) plantarflexion velocity and positive work at the knee joint compared to the footwear with FFC. The results about finite element simulation showed a reduced maximum pressure on the midsole; meanwhile, not significantly affected was the longitudinal bending stiffness and energy return with the SFC compared to the FFC. The results can be used for the design of marathon running shoes, because changing the full carbon fiber plate to segment carbon fiber plate induced some biomechanical transformation but did not significantly affect the running performance, what is more, reducing the peak pressure of the carbon plate to the midsole by cutting the forefoot area of the carbon fiber plate could be beneficial from a long-distance running perspective for manufacturers.

Shoe feature recommendations for different running levels: A Delphi study

Providing runners with footwear that match their functional needs has the potential to improve footwear comfort, enhance running performance and reduce the risk of overuse injuries. It is currently not known how footwear experts make decisions about different shoe features and their properties for runners of different levels. We performed a Delphi study in order to understand: 1) definitions of different runner levels, 2) which footwear features are considered important and 3) how these features should be prescribed for runners of different levels. Experienced academics, journalists, coaches, bloggers and physicians that examine the effects of footwear on running were recruited to participate in three rounds of a Delphi study. Three runner level definitions were refined throughout this study based on expert feedback. Experts were also provided a list of 20 different footwear features. They were asked which features were important and what the properties of those features should be. Twenty-four experts, most with 10+ years of experience, completed all three rounds of this study. These experts came to a consensus for the characteristics of three different running levels. They indicated that 12 of the 20 footwear features initially proposed were important for footwear design. Of these 12 features, experts came to a consensus on how to apply five footwear feature properties for all three different running levels. These features were: upper breathability, forefoot bending stiffness, heel-to-toe drop, torsional bending stiffness and crash pad. Interestingly, the experts were not able to come to a consensus on one of the most researched footwear features, rearfoot midsole hardness. These recommendations can provide a starting point for further biomechanical studies, especially for features that are considered as important, but have not yet been examined experimentally.

Recent Versus Old Previous Injury and Its Association with Running-Related Injuries During Competition by SeRUN® Running Profiles: a Cross-sectional Study

BACKGROUND

Previous injury in the last 12 months is the main risk factor for future running-related injuries (RRI) during training and competition environments. However, the relationship between a recent versus old previous injury and a new RRI has not been established yet, nor a separate analysis by different types of runners.

METHODS

An online questionnaire was sent to 6000 participants of a running event (10 km, 21 km and 42 km), 10 days following the event. The questionnaire included the following information: the presence and topography of new RRIs during the race, old previous injury (from 12-4 months before the race), recent previous injury (from 3-0 months before the race), running experience, training factors and socio-demographic characteristics. Univariate binomial regression analysis was applied to assess different associated factors, and multivariable binomial backward regression (p < 0.05) was used to analyse the relationship between the new and previous injury.

RESULTS

A total of 868 surveys were analysed (10 km, 32.6%; 21 km, 52%; 42 km, 15.4%). The median age was 38 years (IQR 31-46), and 63.5% were males. Previous injury was reported by 30.3% and 27.6% for old and recent, respectively. The majority of runners were categorised into the advanced group (42.9%), having more than 5 years of running experience. During the race, 7.0% reported a RRI, with 36.1% located at the knee. The multivariable analysis showed an association only between new injury and recent injury.

CONCLUSION

The delineation of recent and old previous injuries should be considered in running epidemiological research.