scholarly journals Transitioning from traditional running shoes to barefoot running: probability of success and predictors of failure

2021 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. S41
Author(s):  
N. Collins ◽  
K. Mills ◽  
B. Vicenzino
Keyword(s):  
Barefoot Running ◽  
Running Shoes ◽  
Probability Of Success

Barefoot Running Claims and Controversies

2011 ◽  
Vol 101 (3) ◽  
pp. 231-246 ◽  
Author(s):  
David W. Jenkins ◽  
David J. Cauthon
Keyword(s):  
Key Words ◽  
Training Method ◽  
Review Of The Literature ◽  
Barefoot Running ◽  
Running Shoes ◽  
Improved Performance ◽  
Anecdotal Information

Background: Barefoot running is slowly gaining a dedicated following. Proponents of barefoot running claim many benefits, such as improved performance and reduced injuries, whereas detractors warn of the imminent risks involved. Methods: Multiple publications were reviewed using key words. Results: A review of the literature uncovered many studies that have looked at the barefoot condition and found notable differences in gait and other parameters. These findings, along with much anecdotal information, can lead one to extrapolate that barefoot runners should have fewer injuries, better performance, or both. Several athletic shoe companies have designed running shoes that attempt to mimic the barefoot condition and, thus, garner the purported benefits of barefoot running. Conclusions: Although there is no evidence that either confirms or refutes improved performance and reduced injuries in barefoot runners, many of the claimed disadvantages to barefoot running are not supported by the literature. Nonetheless, it seems that barefoot running may be an acceptable training method for athletes and coaches who understand and can minimize the risks. (J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 101(3): 231–246, 2011)

scholarly journals Development and testing of a new type of „barefoot running shoe“: The freeheel runningpad

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Daumer ◽  
Michael Trost ◽  
Paul Subkowski ◽  
Christian Lederer
Keyword(s):  
Personal Taste ◽  
Barefoot Running ◽  
Considerable Fraction ◽  
Running Shoes ◽  
New Type ◽  
Considerable Size

Common barefoot running shoes or minimal footwear have one or several of the following properties/deficiencies, depending on the type and brand and personal taste: - Coverage of a considerable fraction of the foot’s surface with textile/plastic leading to sub-optimal foot climate - Considerable weight for a true “barefoot shoe” - Toe pockets that do not fit with non-standard feet - Considerable size and thickness, in particular in the heel section of the protective sole for a true “barefoot shoe” - Positive drop and therefore a change in the biomechanics compared to barefoot running. We wanted to design a new type of shoe that would be as close as possible to “real” barefoot running” and thereby overcome one or several of these perceived deficiencies. Whether this would lead to a reduction or increase in running related injuries and how to best train with the new shoes is not within the scope of this article.

A Multivariable Analysis of Lower Extremity Kinematic Asymmetry in Running

1992 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
George Vagenas ◽  
Blaine Hoshizaki
Keyword(s):  
High Speed ◽  
Multivariable Analysis ◽  
Lower Leg ◽  
Lower Limbs ◽  
Distance Runners ◽  
Multivariate Statistical ◽  
Experimental Conditions ◽  
Barefoot Running ◽  
Temporal Variables ◽  
Running Shoes

This study investigated the phenomenon of kinematic asymmetry of the lower limbs in distance runners. The subjects, 29 male distance runners, were recorded by high-speed filming while running on a motor driven treadmill under two experimental conditions (with running shoes and barefoot). Twelve selected kinematic variables were subjected to multivariate statistical analysis. It was demonstrated that the lower limbs of distance runners possess a multifaceted kinematic asymmetry for touchdown and foot contact as well as for the entire phase of foot support of the running stride. Significant kinematic asymmetries were found in the lower leg angle, rearfoot angle, mediolateral velocity of the foot, and in some temporal variables. Contemporary running shoes seem to significantly change the degree of rearfoot control asymmetry observed in normal barefoot running. The findings of the present study confirm previous data suggesting that the phenomenon of kinematic asymmetry in runners is warranted.

scholarly journals Effects of barefoot and minimally shod footwear on effective mass – implications for transient musculoskeletal loading

Kinesiology ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 165-171 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Sinclair ◽  
Philip Stainton ◽  
Sarah Jane Hobbs
Keyword(s):  
Effective Mass ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Loading Rate ◽  
Camera Motion ◽  
Barefoot Running ◽  
Instantaneous Rate ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Running Shoes ◽  
Reaction Forces ◽  
Transient Forces

The purpose of this investigation was to explore the effects of barefoot and minimally shod footwear on effective mass, and determine the implications that this has for transient loading during running. Fifteen male runners ran at 4.0 m/s in five different footwear conditions (barefoot, running trainer, Nike-free, Inov-8 and Vibram five-fingers). Kinematics were collected using an 8 camera motion capture system and ground reaction forces via an embedded force platform. Effective mass was examined using impulse-momentum modelling and differences between footwear were examined using one-way repeated measures ANOVA. The findings showed that effective mass was significantly larger in the barefoot (11.47 %BW), Nike-free (9.81 %BW), Inov-8 (12.10 %BW) and Vibram five-fingers (8.84 %BW) compared to the running trainer (6.86 %BW). Furthermore, instantaneous loading rate was significantly larger in the barefoot (347.55 BW/s), Nike-free (178.76 BW/s), Inov-8 (369.93 BW/s) and Vibram five-fingers (339.37 BW/s) compared to the running trainer (133.18 BW/s). It was also revealed that there were significant positive associations between effective mass and the instantaneous rate of loading for each footwear. The findings from the current investigation indicate that effective mass has key implications for the generation of transient forces and also that running barefoot and in minimally shod footwear may place runners at increased risk from impact related injuries compared to the traditional running shoes

scholarly journals Development and testing of a new type of „barefoot running shoe“: The freeheel runningpad

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Daumer ◽  
Michael Trost ◽  
Paul Subkowski ◽  
Christian Lederer
Keyword(s):  
Personal Taste ◽  
Barefoot Running ◽  
Considerable Fraction ◽  
Running Shoes ◽  
New Type ◽  
Considerable Size

Common barefoot running shoes or minimal footwear have one or several of the following properties/deficiencies, depending on the type and brand and personal taste: - Coverage of a considerable fraction of the foot’s surface with textile/plastic leading to sub-optimal foot climate - Considerable weight for a true “barefoot shoe” - Toe pockets that do not fit with non-standard feet - Considerable size and thickness, in particular in the heel section of the protective sole for a true “barefoot shoe” - Positive drop and therefore a change in the biomechanics compared to barefoot running. We wanted to design a new type of shoe that would be as close as possible to “real” barefoot running” and thereby overcome one or several of these perceived deficiencies. Whether this would lead to a reduction or increase in running related injuries and how to best train with the new shoes is not within the scope of this article.

scholarly journals Initial Response of Mature, Experienced Runners to Barefoot Running: Transition to Forefoot Strike

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 117-120
Author(s):  
Scott M. Mullen ◽  
E. Bruce Toby ◽  
Damon E. Mar ◽  
Megan Bechtold ◽  
Bryan G. Vopat ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Motion Capture ◽  
Initial Response ◽  
Heel Strike ◽  
Motion Capture System ◽  
Barefoot Running ◽  
Limited Ability ◽  
Running Shoes ◽  
Traditional Training ◽  
Foot Strike ◽  
Study Participants

Introduction Forefoot strike has been advocated for many runnersbecause of the relatively lower impact and push-off forces comparedto a heel strike. The purpose of this study was to explore the abilityof mature (> 30 years old), experienced runners to transition from aheel foot strike to a forefoot strike when first introduced to barefootrunning on a treadmill. We hypothesized: 1) mature runners who heelstrike while wearing traditional training shoes would persist in heelstriking immediately following a switch to barefoot, 2) mean shoeheel-to-toe drop would be significantly greater in runners who persistin heel striking when running barefoot compared to those who transitionto a forefoot strike pattern, and 3) there would be a significantdecrease in heel striking in the barefoot condition as running speedsincreased. Methods This was a controlled crossover laboratory study. Thirty-three experienced runners (average 23.4 miles per week) withan average age of 45.6 years were recruited for this study. The participantsfirst ran in their standard running shoes and subsequentlybarefoot. A motion capture system was utilized to detect and analyzeany transition from heel strike to forefoot strike made by study participants. Results Of the 26 participants who were classified as heel strikerunners in their running shoes, 50% (13/26, p = 0.001) transitionedto forefoot strike when changing from running in shoes to runningbarefoot. Conclusions The injuries associated with transition from standardrunning shoes to barefoot running or minimalist shoes may be influencedby the persistence of heel striking in mature runners. Olderexperienced runners may have limited ability to transition from heelto forefoot striking when first introduced to barefoot running. Maturerunners should be cautious when beginning a minimalist shoe orbarefoot running regimen.

Load Distribution in Barefoot Running Shoes

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raoul Gnagne ◽  
Fred Barez ◽  
James Kao ◽  
Amer El-Hage
Keyword(s):  
Finite Element Analysis ◽  
Finite Element ◽  
Load Distribution ◽  
Ancient Greece ◽  
Maximum Compressive Stress ◽  
Equivalent Thickness ◽  
Element Analysis ◽  
Barefoot Running ◽  
Running Shoes ◽  
Olympic Sport

Running is one of the most practiced sports around the world and it dates back to Ancient Greece. Running became an Olympic sport in 1896 and today is mostly performed for fun and to stay in shape. Nowadays, athletic shoe companies make claims on the performance of the type of shoes they manufacture. Some of their claims include shoes that allow free movements, fit like a glove, and are in complete harmony with human mechanics. The preceding characteristics are those of so-called barefoot running shoes. Robillard [1] explains that minimalist running shoes could be defined as those that provide limited or no support and only minimal protection, with the heel at the same level as the forefoot. Even though running may have been investigated, however, there is not enough analyses on barefoot running shoes. The objective of this study was to investigate the load distribution on the feet of a healthy running adult wearing barefoot shoes through experimental work and finite element analysis (FEA). The methodology used in this study included experimental as well FEA. Tests were conducted with a 175-lb adult subject wearing a pair of minimalist shoes. Experimental data were collected and used to perform Finite Element Analysis. The barefoot shoes were modeled with an equivalent thickness of 0.453 inch, and the following parameters were experimentally determined such as the Young’s modulus of 467 psi, a density of 0.0025 lb/in3, and a Poisson’s ratio of 0.08. The simulation results yielded a maximum compressive stress of 38.71 psi in the toe region. This stress level was approximately one-half of the stresses generated in the heel region of conventional sport shoes. This study, further, revealed the reduction of stresses at the heel region with barefoot shoes resulting in lower risk of pain and injury to the foot in the absence of impact transients ordinarily experienced with conventional shoes.

The Torsion of the Foot in Running

1989 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 375-389 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex Stacoff ◽  
Xaver Kaelin ◽  
Edgar Stuessi ◽  
Bernhard Segesser
Keyword(s):  
Lower Leg ◽  
Torsional Stiffness ◽  
Barefoot Running ◽  
Running Shoes ◽  
Running Injuries ◽  
Shoe Soles ◽  
The Relationship

In the research of running shoes, excessive pronation is often related to various running injuries. Anatomically, pronation is a movement that occurs in more than one joint. Previous investigations that evaluated the pronation in running studied the movements of the lower leg and the rearfoot only. However, pronation could also be influenced by the movement of the forefoot and therefore depend on the torsional stiffness of the foot and of the shoe sole. This study investigated the relationship between the torsion and the pronation in running with a rearfoot touchdown and with a forefoot touchdown. The results show that, compared to running barefoot, running with a shoe decreases torsion and thereby increases pronation significantly (p< 0.01) for the forefoot and rearfoot touchdown conditions. Thus the reduction of torsional movement due to stiff shoe soles could well be a reason for running injuries caused by excessive pronation. It is concluded that modern running shoes could be designed to allow a certain torsional movement of the foot.

Impact Loading in Running Shoes with Cushioning Column Systems

2003 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 353-360 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arnel Aguinaldo ◽  
Andrew Mahar
Keyword(s):  
Impact Loading ◽  
Loading Rate ◽  
Impact Force ◽  
Reaction Force ◽  
Barefoot Running ◽  
Running Shoes ◽  
Rearfoot Motion ◽  
Force Data ◽  
Force Characteristics ◽  
Urethane Elastomer

This study evaluated the effects of running shoes—with two types of cushioning column systems—on impact force patterns during running. Kinematic and ground reaction force data were collected from 10 normal participants wearing shoes with the following cushions: 4-column multicellular urethane elastomer (Shoe 1), 4-column thermoplastic polyester elastomer (Shoe 2), and 1-unit EVA foam (Shoe 3). Participants exhibited significantly lower impact force (p = .02) and loading rate (p = .005) with Shoe 2 (1.84 ± 0.24 BW; 45.6 ± 11.6 BW/s) compared to Shoe 1 (1.94 ± 0.18 BW; 57.9 ± 12.1 BW/s). Both cushioning column shoes showed impact force characteristics similar to those of a top-model running shoe (Shoe 3), and improved cushioning performance over shoes previously tested in similar conditions. Alterations in impact force patterns induced by lower limb alignment and running speed were negligible since participants did not differ in ankle position, knee position, or speed during all shod running trials. Ankle plantarflexion, however, was higher for barefoot running, indicating an apparent midfoot strike. Mechanical testing of each shoe during physiologic, cyclic loading demonstrated that Shoe 3 had the greatest stiffness, followed by Shoe 2 and Shoe 1. Shoe 1 was the least stiff of the two shoes with cushioning column systems, yet it displayed a significantly higher impact loading rate during running, possibly due to rearfoot motion alterations induced by the stiffer shoe. This study showed that even in similar shoe types, impact force and loading rate values could vary significantly with midsole cushion constructions. The findings of this study suggest that using these newer running shoes may be effective for runners who want optimal cushioning during running.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document