Shoe Drop Research Articles

The art of choosing the right running shoe review article

This review aims to synthesize current knowledge on running biomechanics, structure and materials of running shoes, and critical factors to consider when choosing the right running shoe to enhance performance and reduce injury risk. A search was performed across major electronic databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Selected studies were then analyzed and synthesized to pinpoint the key factors in choosing the right running shoe, including biomechanics, shoe structure, injury prevention, and the benefits and limitations of different running shoe options. The running shoe choice significantly affects the running performance and injury risk. Key features, such as shoe drop, cushioning, stiffness, and weight must be considered based on the runner’s anatomy, gait, and training regimen. Personalized recommendations, informed by a thorough understanding of shoe biomechanics and individual runner needs, are crucial for optimizing the running efficiency and minimizing injuries.

The biomechanical effects of shoe drop on foot strike and injury risk during running

The biomechanical effects of shoe drop on foot strike and injury risk during running

Influence of shoe drop on running kinematics and kinetics in female runners

This study investigated the effects of shoe drop on lower limb kinematics and kinetics in female runners.Fifteen healthy female runners ran on a 15-m runway at their preferred speed with three different shoe-drop conditions: 0 (D0), 6 (D6) and 10 (D10) mm. Three-dimensional marker positions and ground reaction forces were recorded to analyse kinetic and kinematic parameters using zero- (0D) and one-dimensional (1D) metrics (statistical parametric mapping, SPM). Regarding 0D parameters, significantly higher loading rates and transient peaks were found in D0 compared to D6 and D10 conditions (both p < .01). For 1D analysis, significantly higher ankle dorsiflexion moments were found in D0 compared to D6 and D10 during the braking phase (p < .01). Lower knee extension moments between 52% and 55% and 61% and 65% of contact time (p < .05) were also found. No difference was found between D6 and D10 conditions (p > .05). As previously shown in men, this study demonstrates that shoe drop influences running kinematic and kinetic patterns. Using SPM analysis in conjunction with classical analysis, the study adds new understanding on the influence of shoes on joint moment during contact time.

Effects of shoe drop on running mechanics in women

During the last decade, there has been an increasing enthusiasm in minimalist shoe trend. Consequently, many running shoes companies have promoted a lower drop of their shoes that could cause biome...

Shoe drop reduction influences the lower limb biomechanics of children tennis players during an open stance forehand: A longitudinal study

Compared to traditional tennis shoes, using 0-drop shoes was shown to induce an immediate switch from rear- to forefoot strike pattern to perform an open stance tennis forehand for 30% of children tennis players. The purpose of the study was to examine the long-term effects of a gradual reduction in the shoe drop on the biomechanics of children tennis players performing open stance forehands. Thirty children tennis players participated in 2 laboratory biomechanical test sessions (intermediate: +4 months and final: +8 months) after an inclusion visit where they were randomly assigned to control (CON) or experimental (EXP) group. CON received 12-mm-drop shoes twice, whereas EXP received 8 mm then 4-mm-drop shoes. Strike index indicated that all CON were rearfoot strikers in intermediate and final test sessions. All EXP were rearfoot strikers in intermediate test session, but half the group switched towards a forefoot strike pattern in final test session. This switch resulted in a decreased loading rate of the ground reaction force (−73%, p = .005) but increased peak ankle plantarflexors moment (+47%, p = .050) and peak ankle power absorption (+107%, p = .005) for these participants compared with CON. Biomechanical changes associated with the long-term use of partial minimalist shoes suggest a reduction in heel compressive forces but an increase in Achilles tendon tensile forces.

Long-term effects of gradual shoe drop reduction on young tennis players’ kinematics

Worldwide, tennis is practiced by millions of children, several thousands being intensive players. The participation in high-performance training programmes and competition places them at risk to e...

Adaptation of running pattern to the drop of standard cushioned shoes: A randomised controlled trial with a 6-month follow-up.

While several cross-sectional studies have investigated the acute effects of shoe drop on running biomechanics, the long-term consequences are currently unknown. This study aimed to investigate if the drop of standard cushioned shoes induces specific adaptations in running technique over a six-month period in leisure-time runners. Double-blinded randomised controlled trial. The participants (n=59) received a pair of shoes with a heel-to-toe drop of 10mm (D10), 6mm (D6) or 0mm (D0) and were followed-up regarding running training over 6 months or 500km, whichever came first. Spatio-temporal variables and kinematics (foot/ground, ankle and knee joint angles) were investigated while running at preferred speed on a treadmill before and after the follow-up. The participants ran 332±178km in the study shoes between pre- and post-tests. There was no shoe version by time interaction for any of the spatio-temporal variables nor for lower limb angles at initial ground contact. A small but significant shoe drop effect was found for knee abduction at mid-stance (p=0.032), as it decreased for the D0 version (-0.3±3.1 vs. -1.3±2.6°) while it increased for the D6 (0.3±2.7 vs. 1.3±3.1°) and D10 version (-0.2±3.2 vs. 0.5±3.1°). However, none of the pairwise comparisons was significant in the post-hoc analysis. Apart from knee abduction at mid-stance, no specific adaptation in spatio-temporal variables and kinematics was found between the three shoe versions during this 6-month follow-up. Thus, shoe drop of standard cushioned shoes does not seem to influence running biomechanics in the long term.

IS SHOE DROP A KEY FACTOR FOR INJURY PREVENTION IN RUNNING? PART 2: AN RCT ON RUNNING BIOMECHANICS

BackgroundSo far, only few biomechanical studies have specifically addressed the acute effect of the heel-to-toe drop in running shoes, but longitudinal studies are lacking.ObjectiveOur aim was to investigate if the...

IS SHOE DROP A KEY FACTOR FOR INJURY PREVENTION IN RUNNING? PART 1: AN RCT ON INJURY RISK

BackgroundModern running shoes come in variable heel-to-toe drops, but it is currently unknown if this feature plays a role in the prevention of injuries.ObjectiveTo determine if the drop of conventional...

Influence of the Heel-to-Toe Drop of Standard Cushioned Running Shoes on Injury Risk in Leisure-Time Runners

Background: Modern running shoes are available in a wide range of heel-to-toe drops (ie, the height difference between the forward and rear parts of the inside of the shoe). While shoe drop has been shown to influence strike pattern, its effect on injury risk has never been investigated. Therefore, the reasons for such variety in this parameter are unclear. Purpose: The first aim of this study was to determine whether the drop of standard cushioned running shoes influences running injury risk. The secondary aim was to investigate whether recent running regularity modifies the relationship between shoe drop and injury risk. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. Methods: Leisure-time runners (N = 553) were observed for 6 months after having received a pair of shoes with a heel-to-toe drop of 10 mm (D10), 6 mm (D6), or 0 mm (D0). All participants reported their running activities and injuries (time-loss definition, at least 1 day) in an electronic system. Cox regression analyses were used to compare injury risk between the 3 groups based on hazard rate ratios (HRs) and their 95% CIs. A stratified analysis was conducted to evaluate the effect of shoe drop in occasional runners (<6 months of weekly practice over the previous 12 months) versus regular runners (≥6 months). Results: The overall injury risk was not different among the participants who had received the D6 (HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.86-1.98) or D0 (HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.76-1.80) versions compared with the D10 shoes. After stratification according to running regularity, low-drop shoes (D6 and D0) were found to be associated with a lower injury risk in occasional runners (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.23-0.98), whereas these shoes were associated with a higher injury risk in regular runners (HR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.07-2.62). Conclusion: Overall, injury risk was not modified by the drop of standard cushioned running shoes. However, low-drop shoes could be more hazardous for regular runners, while these shoes seem to be preferable for occasional runners to limit injury risk.

The influence of shoe drop on the kinematics and kinetics of children tennis players

This study investigated the immediate effects of reducing the shoe drop (i.e. the difference between the heel and the forefoot height) on the kinematics and kinetics of the lower extremities of children tennis players performing a tennis-specific movement. Thirteen children tennis players performed a series of simulated open stance forehands wearing 3 pairs of shoes differing only in the drop: 0 (D0), 6 (D6) and the control condition of 12 mm (D12). Two embedded forceplates and a motion capture system were used to analyse the ground reaction forces and ankle and knee joint angles and moments of the leading lower limb. In D6 compared with D12, the peak impact force was reduced by 24% (p = .004) and the ankle was less dorsiflexed at foot strike (p = .037). In D0 compared with D12, the peak impact force was reduced by 17% (p = .049), the ankle was less dorsiflexed at foot strike (p = .045) and the knee was more flexed at foot strike (p = .007). In addition, 4 out of 13 participants (31%) presented a forefoot strike pattern for some of the trials in D0. No difference was observed across shoe conditions for the peak knee extensor moment (p = .658) or the peak ankle plantarflexor moment (p = .071). The results provide preliminary data supporting the hypothesis that for children tennis players, using a 6-mm lower shoe drop might reduce heel impact forces and thus limit potentially impact-related injuries.

Lower shoe drop can reduce impact forces experienced by junior tennis players performing an open-stance forehand

Tennis is practised by a large number of children. This sport is characterised by repeated high-intensity runs comprising acceleration–decelerations and changes of direction, which generate large b...

Shoe drop has opposite influence on running pattern when running overground or on a treadmill.

Minimalist running shoes are designed to induce a foot strike made more with the forepart of the foot. The main changes made on minimalist shoe consist in decreasing the height difference between fore and rear parts of the sole (drop). Barefoot and shod running have been widely compared on overground or treadmill these last years, but the key characteristic effects of minimalist shoes have been yet little studied. The purpose of this study is to find whether the shoe drop has the same effect regardless of the task: overground or treadmill running. Twelve healthy male subjects ran with three shoes of different drops (0, 4, 8 mm) and barefoot on a treadmill and overground. Vertical ground reaction force (vGRF) (transient peak and loading rate) and lower limb kinematics (foot, ankle and knee joint flexion angles) were observed. Opposite footwear effects on loading rate between the tasks were observed. Barefoot running induced higher loading rates during overground running than the highest drop condition, while it was the opposite during treadmill running. Ankle plantar flexion and knee flexion angles at touchdown were higher during treadmill than overground running for all conditions, except for barefoot which did not show any difference between the tasks. Shoe drop appears to be a key parameter influencing running pattern, but its effects on vGRF differ depending on the task (treadmill vs. overground running) and must be considered with caution. Unlike shod conditions, kinematics of barefoot condition was not altered by treadmill running explaining opposite conclusions between the tasks.

Patterns of mediolateral asymmetry in worn footwear

Background: Debate over footwear design and prescription is currently shaped by two opposing paradigms to which the clinician or researcher subscribes. Human structure is considered either ‘poor’ requiring intervention or ‘well-adapted’. The interventionist paradigm directs research on the effect of changing mediolateral footwear bias either within the shoe design or using inserts. However, the mediolateral condition of shoes worn by individuals has seldom been considered or measured.Objective: To describe a clinical assessment tool to measure outer-, mid- and innersole footwear components and report on patterns of mediolateral heel asymmetry in a sample of commonly used footwear.Main Outcome Measure: Total mediolateral asymmetry that includes the difference between medial and lateral outersole (mm), innersoles (mm) and mid- and innersole stiffness (Asker C).Results: A total of 212 shoes provided by 106 participants were assessed, with average shoe age 11.9 months (SD 11.4) and mean use 4.6 hrs.d−1 (SD 3.9). Shoe drop between 1.0 and 3.0 cm was measured in 87.8% of shoes. Zero or symmetrical wear was observed for 41.5% of shoes while 57.6% of shoes had 1 to 5 mm lateral heel degradation. The most frequent was 1 mm (30.2%) followed by 2 mm (12.3%) and 15.1% had 3 to 5 mm. Only 0.9% (2/212) had 1 mm of medial degradation. Asymmetry of wear was influenced by the reported age of the shoe, and females were likely to have greater lateral wear than men.Conclusions: Lateral heel degradation was the most frequently measured mediolateral asymmetry. Mediolateral asymmetry by design and/or degradation was measured in the outer-, mid- and innersoles. These results may be important for related footwear research on aberrant ankle and knee joint function.

The effect of shoe drop on running pattern

During the last couple of years, running barefoot or in minimalist shoes has become more and more popular. The study of Lieberman et al. (2010) showed that habitually barefoot runners do not adopt ...

The effect of shoe drop on running pattern

The effect of shoe drop on running pattern

Norman Podhoretz: a biography

Prologue 1. Brownsville 2. Columbia 3. Cambridge 4. The family and the army 5. The practicing critic 6. Boss 7. 'This was bigger than both of us' 8. One shoe drops 9. Dropping the other shoe 10. Liberalism lost 11. George Lichtheim, Pat Moynihan, and a lecture tour 12. Domesticities, Lillian Hellman, and the question of America's nerve 13. Moynihan, Podhoretz, and 'the party of liberty' 14. Breaking and closing ranks 15. Present dangers 16. 'The great satan of the American romantic left' 17. Regulated hatreds 18. Culture wars 19. A literary Indian summer 20. Verdicts 21. New wars for a new century Epilogue.

The Other Shoe Drops: New WHI Analysis

Results of the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) showed that postmenopausal hormone therapy with conjugated equine estrogens alone or plus

Forecasting impact of new SIPs for chemical emissions control

hosted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) about the topic of reactivity of various chemicals to form ozone -smog ~. Discussions were about the scientific quality of chemical research and mathematical modeling of atmospheric degradation by chemical reaction. A major issue, or importance to metal finishers, presented by and to meeting attendees was what to do with this information relative to state implementation plans (SIPs) for control of chemical emissions. Well, a plan was published by the EPA last fall, and this spring we can see its effects 3-5. We may have got- STATE RIGHTS States are tasked by the EPA with developing their SIPs to meet National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone. Some states are more trouble than others. EPA has designated 126 areas of the country as non-attainment areas. SIPs to overcome this deficiency are due to EPA about a year from when you read this. What strategy will each adopt? EQUALITY AND DIVERSITY Ground-level ozone is one of the principal components of smog. Ozone is not directly emitted. It is formed in the air by chemical reactions of nitrogen oxides (NO x) and VOCs--in the presence of heat and sunlight. So the states' strategy has to manage emissions from automobiles and power plants (NO x) and facto- ries using chemicals (VOCs). To no surprise, all VOCs don't react the same with NO x in the air. And there are literally thousands of individual chemical species of VOCs that can react to form ozone. Even more complexity is added by meteorological conditions and time VOCs emitted from your shop may not form until they get to your competitor's shop (or vice versa) located in a different state. SIMPLICITY IS EASY In the past, EPA has regulated VOC emissions by treating them all as equal on a mass basis--except that a few have been designated to be of lesser con- cern A factory totaled its mass of emissions (with- out any specific chemical analysis) and that was what was regulated by the local SIP In other words, regulation was a valve on the smokestack Those chemicals of lesser concern were called exempt from VOC classification The basis for exemption was atmospheric reactivity measured in a smog chamber Reactivity compared to ethane was the benchmark Since 1977, EPA has designated about 50 chemi- cals or classes of compounds as negligibly reactive and excluded these chemicals from the regulatory definition of VOC. Examples are acetone, t-butyl acetate, most HFEs and HFCs, and perchloroethylene. It's a binary sys- tem-chemicals are VOCs except for a few which aren't. The problem is that 50 isn't a significant number--unless it's your age. SMARTER THAN BRUTE FORCE A goal of this research into atmospheric reactivity of chemicals was to obtain the capability to reduce formation with less disruption and cost to industry as well as doing it sooner to protect the public. One way of achieving that goal was to devel- op a way to rank VOCs on a scale that described their relative capability to react with UV light and NO x to form smog. California has been a leader here--both as the location where much significant research has been done 6, and an adopter of relative reactivity scales for VOCs 7. These scales are now integral to all cred- ible atmospheric mathematical models. ENOUIRING MINDS WANT TO KNOW But will EPA adopt relative reactivity scales for chemicals as a pillar of SIPs or continue with the binary system, which offers limited choice? THE OTHER SHOE DROPS The answer is no, and yes. • EPA is not going to adopt relative reactivity scales for chemical emissions. • EPA is going to expand the number of chemicals defined as VOC exempt. EPA does accept that ...an approach that discrim- inates between VOCs based on reactivity is likely to be more effective and efficient...2. It supports states basing their SIPs on this emerging research. But adoption of relative reactivity scales can't be required now in SIPs for at least four reasons:

Circadian Pathway: The Other Shoe Drops

Three new papers report the long-awaited functional characterization of the Drosophila receptor for the circadian-rhythm-regulating signalling molecule PIGMENT DISPERSING FACTOR (PDF). The discovery of the PDF receptor heralds progress in understanding the circadian pacemaker circuit and output pathways in insects.