New study looking at injury rates and minimalist shoes.
|A new study was published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine that compared injury rates among 99 runners over twelve weeks who were assigned to wear one of three shoes. The shoes were the Nike Pegasus 28, Nike Free 3.0 V2 or Vibram FiverFinger Bikila. 23 injuries were reported with 4 in the Pegasus, 12 in the Nike Free and 7 in the Bikila.
Shin and calf pain were amongst the most common injuries. Different the. What we heard last year when the reports were increased incidence of stress fractures. Although these were bogus studies as they looked at 1-3 runners who never transitioned and just switched shoes.
So what does all this mean? The same thing I’ve been discussing for the last three years. If you change your running form too abruptly, your body is at risk to develop an overuse injury. It’s recommended to follow the 10% adaptation rule. This study just confirms that you need to transition slowly or you may develop an overuse injury.
Remember, it’s all about the form and not the shoes. If you want to improve your running don’t focus on changing your shoes, make sure your form is proper and efficient. With that said, it is sometimes difficult to assume a more natural and efficient form if your in too rigid of a shoe that’s controlling motion.
FROM: Dr. Douglas B. Baumgarten, Director Sportfit Lab
This is an interesting study. However, based on my clinical experience studying the biomechanics of running shoes, I would disagree with the speculation as to why “full” minimalist shoes appear to be safer than “partial” minimalist shoes. Using videography, we observe the biomechanics of runners wearing different shoe types. What I’ve noticed about partial minimalist shoes, is that the combination of a soft foam sole and flimsy uppers causes the foot to strike a shifting interface as it hits the ground. Such an unstable surface will inevitably cause unnatural recruitment of foot and lower leg muscles, as the foot attempts to stabilize itself prior to, and during, push-off. This could be the cause of higher injury rates. Conversely, full minimalist shoes, while less cushioned, provide the runner with a stable foot strike.
Moreover, there is – to my knowledge – very little evidence that minimalist shoes, without specific training, cause runners to automatically change their running style. Indeed, research has so far shown that runners must be taught to change their form, regardless of shoe type.
My clinical experience, though certainly anecdotal, suggests to me that runners who have favorable foot biomechanics (arches neither too rigid nor overpronation) and efficient running form, can transition safely to minimalist shoes. Those with poor form or unfavorable foot structure, will find it extremely difficult to run in minimalist shoes.
“Moreover, there is – to my knowledge – very little evidence that minimalist shoes, without specific training, cause runners to automatically change their running style.”
That’s precisely the problem! 95% of runners heel strike. With true barefoot running, one doesn’t heel strike. But a lot of so called minimalist running shoes have enough of a heel pad that runners continue to heel strike, which I think could well cause certain types of injuries in minimalist running shoes, particularly without gradual transition and adaptation. My own personal recommendation (which, of course, isn’t original with me, as many others have made the same point) would be to wear truly minimalist shoes with an absolute minimum of heel padding, which will force a more flat footed heel strike and a shorter stride. With this type of technique and with gradual build up, I think that the risk of injury from equipment change will be minimized.
– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach CA
I completely agree that all the studies where the subjects are just assigned a pair of shoes and set free to do whatever they wish are ridiculous. Most runners have worn traditional running shoes (e.g. the Nike Pegasus) for years if not decades. So they are assigned to the same type of shoe that they are used to and, of course, they do pretty well. But then they are assigned a radically different type of shoe and they get injured. Well, what do you expect?
I’ve been wearing KSOs and Bikilas for three years — to work; to the gym; out on the trails; in races; to church, whatever — all day long. I currently own 5 pairs of them, including an all black pair of KSOs which serve as my “dress shoes.” I’m 67 years old and I started out very gradually and worked my way up. I gradually changed my running form, as I adapted and experimented. I currently run with a toned lumbar arch in my lower back and a slight forward lean to capture some recoil from my hip flexors. This type of posture gives me a bit of a forefoot to flat strike.
Anyway, I used to suffer from chronic knee pain. Now I have no pain whatsoever and I have great happiness from essentially going close to barefoot all day long, wherever I go. I’m fortunate to live in SoCal and not to have to deal with freezing temperatures and slush, admittedly. Biggest disadvantage is that the shoes pick up and retain a lot of moisture from just walking over grass with morning dew on it. Other than the occasional challenge of keeping my feet dry and that occasional treacherous sharp piece of one inch gravel on a trail, the shoes are a pure joy to wear and in which to run. I’m sure that, were I to abruptly transition to Pegasus and go out and run, my old knee pain would promptly return. Oh, yes, I did get a bad case of shin splints a couple years back. This was pure stupidity, however — fast downhill running on concrete. I just let it go away, re-started running gradually, and I’ve been just fine for the past two years — using some common sense.
– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach CA