The Effect Of Verbal Cues On Lower Extremity Kinetics During Running

Abstract

Previous research indicates that verbal cues such as “push with your feet” can alter ankle and hip kinetics during walking. Clinicians often use cues such as “push with your hips” when working with runners, but the effect of such verbal cues on lower extremity kinetics during running remains poorly understood. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of verbal cues emphasizing use of hips and glutes or use of toes and ankles on lower extremity running kinetics. METHODS: Ten healthy subjects (age 23±1 years, mass 67±16 kg, height 168±11 cm) participated. Subjects performed 3 running trials, at a self-selected pace, on an instrumented treadmill while collecting kinematics and kinetics. First, a baseline running gait was established, then each subject was given the instruction to “push yourself forward with your hips and glutes” or “push yourself forward with your toes and ankles” in a randomized order. After 1 minute to adapt to each condition, 30 seconds of data were recorded. Variables of interest included peak sagittal hip, knee, and ankle moments and positive, negative, and total sagittal work at the hip, knee, and ankle. One-way repeated measures ANOVAs were used to assess kinetic changes across conditions. RESULTS: There was a significant main effect of running cue with respect to negative and total work at the ankle (p=0.031 and p=0.002). Post-hoc analyses indicated that ankle negative work was greater when running with the ankle cue compared to baseline running (-0.44±0.17 J/kg vs -0.38±0.14 J/kg; p=0.031) and ankle total work was greater when running with the ankle cue compared with baseline and hip cue running (p=0.019 - 0.008). There were no significant differences in any of the other lower extremity sagittal moments or work across tasks (p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Subjects demonstrated increased negative and total work at the ankle in response to the ankle running cue. There was no change in positive work, which was anticipated with a cue emphasizing forward propulsion. Running kinetics remained largely unchanged in response to either running cue, possibly due to the quality of the cue (i.e. internal rather than external focus). These data suggest telling clients to “use your hip more to run” may not be an effective method to change running mechanics.