ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2017
Three-Dimensional Biomechanical Analysis of Rearfoot and Forefoot Running.
Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- What are the Benefits and Risks Associated with Changing Foot Strike Pattern During Running? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Injury, Running Economy, and Biomechanics.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2020Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Effects of running speed on the probability of meniscal failure in the knee joint: based on finite element analysis and the Weibull failure model.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Influence of Sudden Changes in Foot Strikes on Loading Rate Variability in Runners.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Is There a Pathologic Running Motion Associated with Running-Related Injuries? A Methodological Study Using a Motion Analysis System Without Sensors.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Article
- Asymmetries of foot strike patterns during running in high-level female and male soccer players.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2023Article
- Biomechanical adaptations during exhaustive runs at 90 to 120% of peak aerobic speed.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Effect of Flat Running Shoes on Hip Kinematics in Male Recreational Runners.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Duty factor and foot-strike pattern do not represent similar running pattern at the individual level.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Validity and reliability of inertial measurement units measurements for running kinematics in different foot strike pattern runners.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Article
- Plantar load characteristics among runners with different strike patterns during preferred speed.Journal of exercise science and fitness · 2020Article
- Running speed-induced changes in foot contact pattern influence impact loading rate.European journal of sport science · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn the running community, a forefoot strike (FFS) pattern is increasingly preferred compared with a rearfoot strike (RFS) pattern. However, it has not been fully understood which strike pattern may better reduce adverse joint forces within the different joints of the lower extremity. PURPOSE: To analyze the 3-dimensional (3D) stress pattern in the ankle, knee, and hip joint in runners with either a FFS or RFS pattern. STUDY
designDescriptive laboratory study.
methodsIn 22 runners (11 habitual rearfoot strikers, 11 habitual forefoot strikers), RFS and FFS patterns were compared at 3.0 m/s (6.7 mph) on a treadmill with integrated force plates and a 3D motion capture analysis system. This combined analysis allowed characterization of the 3D biomechanical forces differentiated for the ankle, knee, and hip joint. The maximum peak force (MPF) and maximum loading rate (LR) were determined in their 3 ordinal components: vertical, anterior-posterior (AP), and medial-lateral (ML).
resultsFor both strike patterns, the vertical components of the MPF and LR were significantly greater than their AP or ML components. In the vertical axis, FFS was generally associated with a greater MPF but significantly lower LR in all 3 joints. The AP components of MPF and LR were significantly lower for FFS in the knee joint but significantly greater in the ankle and hip joints. The ML components of MPF and LR tended to be greater for FFS but mostly did not reach a level of significance.
conclusionFFS and RFS were associated with different 3D stress patterns in the ankle, knee, and hip joint, although there was no global advantage of one strike pattern over the other. The multimodal individual assessment for the different anatomic regions demonstrated that FFS seems favorable for patients with unstable knee joints in the AP axis and RFS may be recommended for runners with unstable ankle joints. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Different strike patterns show different 3D stress in joints of the lower extremity. Due to either rehabilitation after injuries or training in running sports, rearfoot or forefoot running should be preferred to prevent further damage or injuries caused by inadequate biomechanical load. Runners with a history of knee joint injuries may benefit from FFS whereas RFS may be favorable for runners with a history of ankle joint injuries.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.