Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

The effect of changing foot progression angle using real-time visual feedback on rearfoot eversion during running.
PLoS One. 2021; 16(2):e0246425.Plos

Abstract

Atypical rearfoot in/eversion may be an important risk factor for running-related injuries. Prominent interventions for atypical rearfoot eversion include foot orthoses, footwear, and taping but a modification derived from gait retraining to correct atypical rearfoot in/eversion is lacking. We aimed to investigate changes in rearfoot in/eversion, subtalar pronation, medial longitudinal arch angle, and selected lower limb joint biomechanics while performing toe-in/toe-out running using real-time visual feedback. Fifteen female runners participated in this study. Subjects performed toe-in/toe-out running using real-time visual feedback on foot progression angle, which was set ±5° from habitual foot progression angle. 3D kinematics of rearfoot in/eversion, subtalar supination/pronation, medial longitudinal arch angle, foot progression angle, hip flexion, ab/adduction and internal/external rotation, knee flexion, ankle dorsiflexion, and ankle power were analyzed. A repeated-measures ANOVA followed by pairwise comparisons was used to analyze changes between three conditions. Toe-in running compared to normal and toe-out running reduced peak rearfoot eversion (mean difference (MD) with normal = 2.1°; p<0.001, MD with toe-out = 3.5°; p<0.001), peak pronation (MD with normal = -2.0°; p<0.001, MD with toe-out = -3.4; p = <0.001), and peak medial longitudinal arch angle (MD with normal = -0.7°; p = 0.022, MD with toe-out = -0.9; p = 0.005). Toe-out running significantly increased these kinematic factors compared to normal and toe-in running. Toe-in running compared to normal running increased peak hip internal rotation (MD = 2.3; p<0.001), and reduced peak knee flexion (MD = 1.3; p = 0.014). Toe-out running compared to normal running reduced peak hip internal rotation (MD = 2.5; p<0.001), peak hip ab/adduction (MD = 2.5; p<0.001), peak knee flexion (MD = 1.5; p = 0.003), peak ankle dorsiflexion (MD = 1.6; p<0.001), and peak ankle power (MD = 1.3; p = 0.001). Runners were able to change their foot progression angle when receiving real-time visual feedback for foot progression angle. Toe-in/toe-out running altered rearfoot kinematics and medial longitudinal arch angle, therefore supporting the potential value of gait retraining focused on foot progression angle using real-time visual feedback when atypical rearfoot in/eversion needs to be modified. It should be considered that changes in foot progression angle when running is accompanied by changes in lower limb joint biomechanics.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands. Department of Health and Sport Medicine, Faculty of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran. Center for Human Movement Science, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.Department of Health and Sport Medicine, Faculty of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.Center for Human Movement Science, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands. Department of Sports Medicine, Gelderse Vallei Hospital, Ede, The Netherlands.Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

33566828

Citation

Mousavi, Seyed Hamed, et al. "The Effect of Changing Foot Progression Angle Using Real-time Visual Feedback On Rearfoot Eversion During Running." PloS One, vol. 16, no. 2, 2021, pp. e0246425.
Mousavi SH, van Kouwenhove L, Rajabi R, et al. The effect of changing foot progression angle using real-time visual feedback on rearfoot eversion during running. PLoS One. 2021;16(2):e0246425.
Mousavi, S. H., van Kouwenhove, L., Rajabi, R., Zwerver, J., & Hijmans, J. M. (2021). The effect of changing foot progression angle using real-time visual feedback on rearfoot eversion during running. PloS One, 16(2), e0246425. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0246425
Mousavi SH, et al. The Effect of Changing Foot Progression Angle Using Real-time Visual Feedback On Rearfoot Eversion During Running. PLoS One. 2021;16(2):e0246425. PubMed PMID: 33566828.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - The effect of changing foot progression angle using real-time visual feedback on rearfoot eversion during running. AU - Mousavi,Seyed Hamed, AU - van Kouwenhove,Laurens, AU - Rajabi,Reza, AU - Zwerver,Johannes, AU - Hijmans,Juha M, Y1 - 2021/02/10/ PY - 2020/03/04/received PY - 2021/01/19/accepted PY - 2021/2/10/entrez PY - 2021/2/11/pubmed PY - 2021/8/4/medline SP - e0246425 EP - e0246425 JF - PloS one JO - PLoS One VL - 16 IS - 2 N2 - Atypical rearfoot in/eversion may be an important risk factor for running-related injuries. Prominent interventions for atypical rearfoot eversion include foot orthoses, footwear, and taping but a modification derived from gait retraining to correct atypical rearfoot in/eversion is lacking. We aimed to investigate changes in rearfoot in/eversion, subtalar pronation, medial longitudinal arch angle, and selected lower limb joint biomechanics while performing toe-in/toe-out running using real-time visual feedback. Fifteen female runners participated in this study. Subjects performed toe-in/toe-out running using real-time visual feedback on foot progression angle, which was set ±5° from habitual foot progression angle. 3D kinematics of rearfoot in/eversion, subtalar supination/pronation, medial longitudinal arch angle, foot progression angle, hip flexion, ab/adduction and internal/external rotation, knee flexion, ankle dorsiflexion, and ankle power were analyzed. A repeated-measures ANOVA followed by pairwise comparisons was used to analyze changes between three conditions. Toe-in running compared to normal and toe-out running reduced peak rearfoot eversion (mean difference (MD) with normal = 2.1°; p<0.001, MD with toe-out = 3.5°; p<0.001), peak pronation (MD with normal = -2.0°; p<0.001, MD with toe-out = -3.4; p = <0.001), and peak medial longitudinal arch angle (MD with normal = -0.7°; p = 0.022, MD with toe-out = -0.9; p = 0.005). Toe-out running significantly increased these kinematic factors compared to normal and toe-in running. Toe-in running compared to normal running increased peak hip internal rotation (MD = 2.3; p<0.001), and reduced peak knee flexion (MD = 1.3; p = 0.014). Toe-out running compared to normal running reduced peak hip internal rotation (MD = 2.5; p<0.001), peak hip ab/adduction (MD = 2.5; p<0.001), peak knee flexion (MD = 1.5; p = 0.003), peak ankle dorsiflexion (MD = 1.6; p<0.001), and peak ankle power (MD = 1.3; p = 0.001). Runners were able to change their foot progression angle when receiving real-time visual feedback for foot progression angle. Toe-in/toe-out running altered rearfoot kinematics and medial longitudinal arch angle, therefore supporting the potential value of gait retraining focused on foot progression angle using real-time visual feedback when atypical rearfoot in/eversion needs to be modified. It should be considered that changes in foot progression angle when running is accompanied by changes in lower limb joint biomechanics. SN - 1932-6203 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/33566828/The_effect_of_changing_foot_progression_angle_using_real_time_visual_feedback_on_rearfoot_eversion_during_running_ L2 - https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0246425 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -