Differences in kinetic asymmetry between injured and noninjured novice runners: a prospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this prospective study was to describe natural levels of asymmetry in running, compare levels of asymmetry between injured and noninjured novice runners and compare kinetic variables between the injured and noninjured lower limb within the novice runners with an injury. METHODS: At baseline vertical ground reaction forces and symmetry angles (SA) were assessed with an instrumented treadmill equipped with three force measuring transducers. Female participants ran at 8 and 9 km h(-1) and male runners ran at 9 and 10 km h(-1). Participants were novice female and male recreational runners and were followed during a 9-week running program. RESULTS: Two hundred and ten novice runners enrolled this study, 133 (63.3%) female and 77 (36.7%) male runners. Thirty-four runners reported an RRI. At baseline SA values varied widely for all spatio-temporal and kinetic variables. The inter-individual differences in SA were also high. No significant differences in SA were found between female and male runners running at 9 km h(-1). In injured runners the SA of the impact peak was significantly lower compared to noninjured runners. CONCLUSIONS: Natural levels of asymmetry in running were high. The SA of impact peak in injured runners was lower compared to noninjured runners and no differences were seen between the injured and noninjured lower limbs.

Incidence and risk factors of running-related injuries during preparation for a 4-mile recreational running event.

OBJECTIVE: In this study, the incidence and the sex-specific predictors of running-related injury (RRI) among a group of recreational runners training for a 4-mile running event were determined and identified, respectively. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. METHODS: Several potential risk factors were prospectively measured in 629 novice and recreational runners. They were observed during an 8-week training period for any running-related musculoskeletal injuries of the lower limbs and back. A running-related injury was defined as any musculoskeletal pain of the lower limb or back causing a restriction of running for at least 1 day. RESULTS: At least one RRI was reported by 25.9% of the runners during the 8-week observation period. The incidence of RRI was 30.1 (95% CI 25.4 to 34.7) per 1000 h of running exposure. Multivariate Cox regression showed that male participants were more prone to sustain a RRI than female participants (HR 1.4; 95% CI 1.0 to 2.0). No previous running experience was the most important risk factor in male (HR 2.6; 95% CI 1.2 to 5.5) and female (HR 2.1; 95% CI 1.2 to 3.7) participants. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of running-related injuries in recreational runners preparing for a 4-mile running event is substantially high. Male and female participants have different risk profiles. Furthermore, the findings suggest that novice runners may benefit the most out of preventive interventions for RRI.

[The value of preventive advice and examination focusing on cardiovascular events and injury for novice runners]. / De waarde van preventieve adviezen en keuringen bij beginnende hardlopers met het oog op cardiovasculaire gebeurtenissen en blessures.

Novice runners often seek advice from a physician about training responsibly. Common concerns include sudden cardiac arrest, advice on running injuries and how to avoid these events. Cardiologic screening and ergometry are only beneficial if the athlete has a high-risk profile. In the world of running, there are many myths regarding the prevention ofinjuries. Many recommendations on the use of running shoes, supportive insoles, running on soft or hard surfaces and the value of stretching have been made based on empirical evidence. The actual effects of these recommendations on injury prevention, however, have not been evaluated sufficiently. The value of preventive examination of structural and locomotor elements is also unclear at this time. Progression of training load in which the duration and intensity of training increases by less than 10% per week, appears to be the most reasonable way to prevent running injuries.