The Relationship between Running Economy and Shoe Choice

The Relationship between Running Economy and Shoe Choice Blog

Whether you are new to running or have been pounding the pavement for many years, you will likely be interested in techniques that are used to differentiate between different kinds of running shoes.

Though there have long been discussions about running economy as it pertains to barefoot running, minimalist shoes, and standard shoes, recent studies have indicated that you should rely on your own physical characteristics to determine which one will work best for you. In short, there is no real worldwide standard, and runners should ultimately choose to run in a medium that best fits their own stride.

Clinical Studies

A recent study that appeared in the Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research sought to follow nine recreational runners over the period of a few days. Researchers took special statistical notice of the following areas:

  •  consumption of oxygen
  •  frequency of step
  •  stack height
  •  overall stride length
  •  contact angle
  •  statistical injury risk

The study has concluded, quite forcefully, that runners should ultimately consider their own history to determine whether they would like to continue running barefoot, with minimalist shoes, or with standard running shoes with traditional cushioning. Runners should also feel perfectly comfortable switching to a different kind of shoe if their physical characteristics seem to require it.

Study Consensus

Running economy, which refers generally to running efficiency and thus overall performance, has been shown to be generally equal across the shoe spectrum. Some studies show minimalism to be more efficient, while others show standard running shoes to be the best way to go. The statistical average falls somewhere in the middle.

While it is possible for proponents of one particular side to hand-pick evidence to support their position, this would not be an honest interpretation of the results. There is simply no grand, comprehensive study that shows either standard shoes or minimalist shoes to be better than the other. Subject variability is the ultimate determining factor, which means the flexibility to choose different running shoes is more viable than previously thought.

Gradual accommodation to minimalist running will yield better results than an immediate changeover. Once runners have been training in minimalist shoes for several weeks, for example, the contours of the foot will adjust to the change and may yield better results. Reputable studies allow for a changeover period so that the body has a chance to yield to the new mechanism of action.

Sample Size

When studies are conducted as rigorously as this one, sample size does not necessarily play a determining role. The ultimate arbiter is the data itself. Though some people may not be particularly happy that standard running and minimalist running are not so different after all, they may not simply disavow a study because it only followed nine runners.

In the end, runners should consider their foot mechanics, injury history, and body type before choosing a shoe that works best for them. Physical variability ensures that there is no true standard within the sport.

130 West 42 Street Suite 1055, New York NY 10036
bg

In this instance, an athlete was originally diagnosed with minor quadriceps muscle strain and was treated for four weeks, with unsatisfactory results. When he came to our clinic, the muscle was not healing, and the patients’ muscle tissue had already begun to atrophy.

Upon examination using MSUS, we discovered that he had a full muscle thickness tear that had been overlooked by his previous provider. To mitigate damage and promote healing, surgery should have been performed immediately after the injury occurred. Because of misdiagnosis and inappropriate treatment, the patient now has permanent damage that cannot be corrected.

The most important advantage of Ultrasound over MRI imaging is its ability to zero in on the symptomatic region and obtain imaging, with active participation and feedback from the patient. Using dynamic MSUS, we can see what happens when patients contract their muscles, something that cannot be done with MRI. From a diagnostic perspective, this interaction is invaluable.

Dynamic ultrasonography examination demonstrating
the full thickness tear and already occurring muscle atrophy
due to misdiagnosis and not referring the patient
to proper diagnostic workup

Demonstration of how very small muscle defect is made and revealed
to be a complete tear with muscle contraction
under diagnostic sonography (not possible with MRI)

image

Complete tear of rectus femoris
with large hematoma (blood)

image

Separation of muscle ends due to tear elicited
on dynamic sonography examination

contact-form-animation
You can call
or Send message