Full Length ArticleA prospective comparison of lower extremity kinematics and kinetics between injured and non-injured collegiate cross country runners
Introduction
Recreational distance running is a popular sport in the United States, and 20% of Americans choose running as their physical activity, participating in a large number of running events such as marathons (Fields, 2011, Fields et al., 2010). Furthermore, participation in competitive collegiate running has doubled within the past 30 years (Irick, 2011). Although distance running is beneficial for long-term cardiovascular and joint health (Lane et al., 1986, Willick and Hansen, 2010), the prevalence of running related injury (RRI) is high (Fields, 2011, Yang et al., 2012). Approximately 50% of recreational distance runners will become injured annually with at least 25% being injured at any given time (Fields, 2011). Among all collegiate sports, men’s cross country athletes sustain the most injuries with 30% of runners developing a RRI (Yang et al., 2012). In addition to the physical injuries sustained, the financial burden of RRIs can be staggering. An examination of recreational runners in the Netherlands estimates financial burdens totaling close to $7 billion in direct and indirect costs given the high number of participants and injury rates (Hespanhol Junior, van Mechelen, Postuma, & Verhagen, 2016). As such, identification of the underlying factors for injury development is warranted.
The etiology of RRIs is multifactorial and certain biomechanical factors in running gait are linked to the development of RRI. For instance, greater vertical loading rates (Bredeweg et al., 2013, Davis et al., 2016), greater external knee adduction moments (KAM) (Earl & Hoch, 2011), greater hip adduction angles (Ferber et al., 2010, Milner et al., 2010), greater hip internal rotation (Niemuth, Johnson, Myers, & Thieman, 2005), ankle eversion angles (Kuhman, Paquette, Peel, & Melcher, 2016), peak ankle eversion velocity (Messier & Pittala, 1988), ankle eversion range of motion (ROM) (Viitasalo & Kvist, 1983), and rearfoot-strike types (Daoud et al., 2012) contribute to the incidence of various RRIs. Unfortunately, most studies (Daoud et al., 2012, Ferber et al., 2010, Milner et al., 2010) have utilized samples that were already injured at the time of testing, or were previously injured, and there are limited prospective data regarding biomechanical contributors to RRI. A recent study (Kuhman et al., 2016) examined the prospective influence of ankle kinematics and ground reaction force variables on RRI, but did not report knee or hip kinematics and kinetics. Importantly, knee and hip kinematics and kinetics (increased hip adduction angle, KAM) are retrospectively linked to RRI (Ferber et al., 2010, Nakagawa et al., 2012, Noehren et al., 2013), and the knee is the most commonly injured joint in runners (Fields, 2011). Therefore, ankle, knee, and hip kinematics and kinetics should be examined prospectively in order to build upon the current body of literature, particularly the findings regarding ankle kinematics and ground reaction force variables (Kuhman et al., 2016).
In addition to biomechanical alterations, anatomical, and training factors can contribute to RRI, and may confound any biomechanical influence on RRI. For example, retrospectively, greater training frequency (Taunton et al., 2003), and training to compete (Yang et al., 2012) contribute to RRI. Prospective research indicates that greater weekly mileage (van der Worp et al., 2016) and rapid increases in training volume (Gabbett et al., 2016, Nielsen et al., 2014) lead to RRI, while greater navicular drop contributes to medial tibial stress syndrome (Bennett et al., 2001). Finally, many of the aforementioned studies have evaluated samples of recreational or novice runners (Bredeweg et al., 2013, Buist et al., 2010, Taunton et al., 2003, van der Worp et al., 2016), and collegiate runners may be at greater risk than recreational runners due to the competitive nature of their sport and volume of training (Yang et al., 2012). Despite the potential increase in risk, only two studies have examined collegiate cross country runners (Daoud et al., 2012, Kuhman et al., 2016).
The purpose of this study was to prospectively examine the influence of ankle, knee, and hip kinematics and kinetics, and GRF characteristics on RRI in a group of collegiate cross country runners over a 4-month period. We hypothesized that runners who sustained a RRI would exhibit altered biomechanics (greater vertical loading rate, greater KAM, greater hip internal rotation angle, greater hip adduction angle, greater hip adduction moment, greater knee abduction angle, greater ankle eversion angle, greater ankle eversion ROM, or greater peak ankle eversion velocity) prior to the start of the season compared to runners who did not sustain a RRI.
Section snippets
Participants
Thirty-two non-injured, NCAA Division 1, cross country athletes were initially included in the study (Table 1). As they were all part of the same collegiate team, running exposure (volume, duration, intensity, surface etc.) was similar for all participants. Participants were excluded if they were currently diagnosed with any RRI, or had sustained any RRI in the 6 months prior to the start of the study. Prior to any testing, all participants read and signed an informed consent document approved
Results
All data were found to be normal and treated as such, and no outliers were identified and all cases were included in analyses. Participant characteristics were similar between groups (Table 1). Incidence of RRI during the 14-week season was 38.7% with 12 athletes becoming injured. The most common sites of injury were the knee (33.3%) and shank (25.0%), additional sites of injury included the hip, foot, and thigh (Table 2).
Runners who sustained an injury had a greater external KAM compared to
Discussion
The purpose of this study was to prospectively examine the influence of ankle, knee, and hip kinematics and kinetics, and GRF characteristics on the incidence of RRI. We hypothesized that runners who sustained a RRI would exhibit a greater loading rate, greater KAM, greater hip internal rotation angle, greater hip adduction angle, greater hip adduction moment, greater knee abduction angle, greater ankle eversion angle, greater ankle eversion ROM, or greater peak ankle eversion velocity compared
Conclusion
The findings of this study indicate that the KAM and ankle eversion velocity may be important contributors to the development of RRI in collegiate cross country runners. Findings from this study may be limited to athletes of similar skill level, training, and competition load. Future prospective studies should examine strategies for reducing the KAM and ankle eversion velocity in an effort to prevent RRI.
Conflicts of interest
The authors have no conflicts of interest.
Funding sources
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the University cross country team members and coaching staff for their assistance with the study.
References (34)
- et al.
A kinematic method for footstrike pattern detection in barefoot and shod runners
Gait & Posture
(2012) - et al.
Differences in kinetic variables between injured and noninjured novice runners: A prospective cohort study
Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport
(2013) - et al.
Comparison of ankle kinematics and ground reaction forces between prospectively injured and uninjured collegiate cross country runners
Human Movement Science
(2016) - et al.
Running and osteoarthritis
Clinics in Sports Medicine
(2010) - et al.
Fore- and rearfoot kinematics in high- and low-arched individuals during running
Foot & Ankle International
(2011) - et al.
Factors contributing to the development of medial tibial stress syndrome in high school runners
Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy
(2001) - et al.
Incidence and risk factors of running-related injuries during preparation for a 4-mile recreational running event
British Journal of Sports Medicine
(2010) - et al.
Foot strike and injury rates in endurance runners: A retrospective study
Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise
(2012) - et al.
Greater vertical impact loading in female runners with medically diagnosed injuries: A prospective investigation
British Journal of Sports Medicine
(2016) - et al.
A proximal strengthening program improves pain, function, and biomechanics in women with patellofemoral pain syndrome
American Journal of Sports Medicine
(2011)
Changes in knee biomechanics after a hip-abductor strengthening protocol for runners with patellofemoral pain syndrome
Journal of Athletic Training
Competitive female runners with a history of iliotibial band syndrome demonstrate atypical hip and knee kinematics
Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy
Running injuries – Changing trends and demographics
Current Sports Medicine Reports
Prevention of running injuries
Current Sports Medicine Reports
Frontal plane running biomechanics in female runners with previous iliotibial band syndrome
Journal of Applied Biomechanics
High training workloads alone do not cause sports injuries: How you get there is the real issue
British Journal of Sports Medicine
Effects of isolated hip abductor fatigue on frontal plane knee mechanics
Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise
Cited by (34)
Relationship between ankle dorsiflexion range of motion and sprinting and jumping ability in young athletes
2024, Journal of Bodywork and Movement TherapiesAre alterations in running biomechanics associated with running injuries? A systematic review with meta-analysis
2023, Brazilian Journal of Physical TherapyThe “impacts cause injury” hypothesis: Running in circles or making new strides?
2023, Journal of BiomechanicsDevelopment of a trail running injury screening instrument: A multiple methods approach
2022, Physical Therapy in SportBiomechanical risk factors for running-related injury differ by sample population: A systematic review and meta-analysis
2020, Clinical BiomechanicsCitation Excerpt :Pooled analysis yielded conflicting evidence for the role of average vertical loading rate in the development of RRIs in female recreational runners (Fig. 2; Table 3) (Davis et al., 2016; Napier et al., 2018). In collegiate cross-country runners, there was limited evidence that average vertical loading rate is not an important factor in the development of RRI (Dudley et al., 2017). For instantaneous vertical loading rate, two separate pooled analyses were completed.
Differences in running biomechanics between a maximal, traditional, and minimal running shoe
2020, Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport