Can minimal running shoes imitate barefoot heel-toe running patterns? A comparison of lower leg kinematics

Abstract

BackgroundNumerous studies about the interaction between footwear (and barefoot) and kinematic and kinetic outcomes have been published over the last few years. Recent studies however lead to the conclusion that the assumed interactions depend mainly on the subjects' experience of barefoot (BF) walking/running, the preferred running strike pattern, the speed, the hardness of the surface, the thickness of the midsole material, and the runners' level of ability. The aim of the present study was to investigate lower leg kinematics of BF running and running in minimal running shoes (MRS) to assess comparability of BF kinematics in both conditions. To systematically compare both conditions we monitored the influencing variables described above in our measurement setup. We hypothesized that running in MRS does not alter lower leg kinematics compared to BF running. MethodsThirty-seven subjects, injury-free and active in sports, ran BF on an EVA foam runway, and also ran shod wearing Nike Free 3.0 on a tartan indoor track. Lower-leg 3D kinematics was measured to quantify rearfoot and ankle movements. Skin markers were used in both shod and BF running. ResultsAll runners revealed rearfoot strike pattern when running barefoot. Differences between BF and MRS running occurred particularly during the initial stance phase of running, both in the sagittal and the frontal planes. BF running revealed a flatter foot placement, a more plantar flexed ankle joint and less inverted rearfoot at touchdown compared to MRS running. ConclusionBF running does not change the landing automatically to forefoot running, especially after a systematic exclusion of surface and other influencing factors. The Nike Free 3.0 mimics some BF features. Nevertheless, changes in design of the Nike Free should be considered in order to mimic BF movement even more closely.