Welcome to the Podiatry Arena forums

You are currently viewing our podiatry forum as a guest which gives you limited access to view all podiatry discussions and access our other features. By joining our free global community of Podiatrists and other interested foot health care professionals you will have access to post podiatry topics (answer and ask questions), communicate privately with other members, upload content, view attachments, receive a weekly email update of new discussions, access other special features. Registered users do not get displayed the advertisements in posted messages. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our global Podiatry community today!

  1. Have you considered the Clinical Biomechanics Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Have you considered the Clinical Biomechanics Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
Dismiss Notice
Have you liked us on Facebook to get our updates? Please do. Click here for our Facebook page.
Dismiss Notice
Do you get the weekly newsletter that Podiatry Arena sends out to update everybody? If not, click here to organise this.

Sensitive/proprioceptive heel strike during running

Discussion in 'Biomechanics, Sports and Foot orthoses' started by Blaise Dubois, Dec 15, 2011.

  1. Re: Hoka Ones

    Blaise:

    How do you know that 95% of recreational runners "have no choice" in the shoes they buy? Do the shoe salesman force them to only buy one type of shoe? Do you have a reference that supports this conjecture of yours? You must be joking?!

    Also, how do you get this opinion that runners "prefers light trainers over motion control shoes" out of the 2010 study by Kong et al where they were studying the kinetic and kinematic effects caused by shoe degradation???

     
  2. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Active Member

    I'm sure you are joking ;)

    100% agree!!! Love your quote...

    Every clinician practices within his own knowledge. This knowledge is constantly brought to the next level by continuing education, which is unfortunately frequently influenced by promoters who have commercial or philosophical interests. Therefore, we are looking to be oriented towards best practice by rigorous and unbiased science that could be clinically applicable. New clinical guidelines are frequently produced, and a knowledge transfer process is used to spread new information among practitioners. These guidelines bring clinicians to realize how aberrant are certain aspects of their practice, and lead them to change these concepts that maybe were present for a long time… a laborious and sometimes painful process that requires humility!

    I personally think that we should elaborate evidence-based clinical guidelines to change our aberrant practices relative to the promotion and the prescription of running shoes. I completely change my practice 10 years ago after some reflexions... based on available scientific literature... it was painful: not my feet... my ego.
     
  3. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Active Member

    Re: Hoka Ones

    Kevin,
    95% because there is juste that kind of shoes in the shoe shop!!! Do you know a shoe salesman that propose a racing flat shoes in the choice of shoes he propose to his client... if the client doesn't ask specifically this kind of shoes? And if he asks, he will be discouraged to buy it... it's for tiny fast runners only
    (I'm happy to know that it's a little better since 2 years with the trend of minimalist shoes)

    Kong wrote many articles in 2010!

    Shoe preference based on subjective comfort for walking and running
    Kong P.W. and Bagdon M.
    Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association 2010 100:6 (456-462)
    Background: Subjective comfort of footwear is important for shoe and orthosis design. This study compared shoe preferences between walking and running, using subjective comfort as an outcome tool. Methods: Forty-one participants walked and ran 20 times each along a runway in three types of footwear (cushioning, lightweight, and stability) and chose the model that they preferred most for walking and running separately based on subjective comfort. Results: More participants preferred the cushioning model ( walking, 34%; running, 41%) or the lightweight model ( walking, 44%; running, 41%) over the stability model ( walking, 22%; running, 17%). x2 tests revealed no differences between walking and running, runners and nonrunners, and lighter and heavier individuals. Women were more likely (odds ratio = 4.09) to prefer the lightweight model, whereas men preferred the cushioning (odds ratio = 2.05) and stability (odds ratio = 3.19) models. Most participants (71%) chose the same model for both activities. Conclusions: Shoe preference varies among individuals and is influenced by sex. Most people feel comfortable walking and running in the same shoe model.
     
  4. Re: Hoka Ones

    I hope that a shoe salesman does not try to sell a beginning runner a racing flat to train in on concrete or asphalt! Just because you think this is best, Blaise, doesn't mean that it is best...unless you have some good scientific evidence of such and something more than just your anecdotal experience of putting 1,000 runners into racing flats in Montreal with "excellent results".

    I have put 10,000 runners into thicker soled training shoes over the past 26 years here in Sacramento with excellent results so my anecdotal experience beats yours by a factor of 10X. ;-)

    Seriously, though, I think that the majority of runners still self-select to run in more thicker soled running shoes because thicker soled running shoes are simply more comfortable to run in, especially on asphalt and concrete where many runners choose to run. I ran in plenty of thin soled shoes when I was running 70-100 miles per week and these shoes were only comfortable to run in on grass or when racing to reduce shoe mass. The best shoes for me and nearly every other high-caliber collegiate runner to train in were thicker soled shoes, not the minimalist racing flats that you think everyone should be running all their miles in. I wonder why some of the best ultra distance runners in the world choose the Hoka One One shoe to run their events in...a shoe which you call "Super Extra Bulky Shoes". You know, Blaise, Hoka One One shoes were designed by some French trail runners.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrAF6ZrI1v0

    And, I don't even know why, Blaise, that you get so excited about reducing impact shock. There is no conclusive evidence that impact shock is the cause of even a minority of running injuries.

    Here is what the world's best scientific researcher on running biomechanics, Benno Nigg, says about impact shock and it's relation to running injuries in his latest book.

    Maybe once you have sufficient data, Blaise, to actually support your conjecture that impact shock is a major cause of running injuries, and you then also have sufficient data to support your conjecture that running in thin soled shoes reduces injuries and doesn't cause other types of injuries, then I will be more impressed with your opinions. Until then, I am having a great time "chewing the cud" with you and hope you stick around for more fun. I'm just getting interested.:drinks
     
  5. Blaise:

    It would probably not be good for you, since you seem to want to be scientific, to start delving into the "mystical arts" to come up with a term such as "sensitive heel strike" to describe one type of footstrike versus another.

    How exactly are you determining that one footstrike is more "sensitive" than another footstrike? Or, as I suspect, you just guessing that this is the case and have not a shred of scientific evidence that the people who heel strike a certain way have any more "sensitivity", whatever that is, than the people who heel strike another way.

    It is rather funny, Blaise, that you quote scientific studies in your writings extensively, but, you come up with these mystical, non-scientific terms such as "proprioceptive" and "sensitive" to try to categorize one type of heel-striking runner versus another type of heel-striking runner when you have absolutely no research basis, no data and just pure conjecture to come up with these useless, unscientific terms to describe heel-striking runners.

    I'll ask you once again, Blaise...can you come up with an good definition for what a "sensitive heel striker" actually is? How do you scientifically measure this sensitivity? Or do you just pull these terms out of your hat, with no valid scientific meaning to back up these terms?
     
  6. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Active Member

    Re: Hoka Ones

    Yes, I do. Give me one logical piece of science or clinics that justify the prescription of the big bulky shoes for a beginner. You need to prove that, more than me... you do a bigger intervention (its like giving pills for a specific pathology... more the intervention is far from "nothing/habit/nature"... and more it's invasive or have the potential to change the homeostasis... more you need to explain and to justify!!!)

    So that's for a new post
    1. If someone starts a running program, which kind of shoe would you recommend to this person?
    2. What type do you recommend to children and teenagers who run?
    4. Do the BBS (light trainer or bigger... 90% of the market) prevent from injuries?


    Which years?, not sure it was the same kind of shoes that now...

    The best run in more flat shoes that even big bulky shoes (Kuprika, Jornet, ...)

    I told in a recent post that the science is not so stong in that topic and explain one essential concept of ADAPTATION (even to big impact force).
    But the subject is still debatable (Ask Davis, Powers, Ferber, Hamill, ...) ... and vertical loading rate is certainly better to look that peak pressure (one of the best argument of Simon Bartold to justify is BBS)

    I agree that Nigg is the more prolific author in the world about shoes and is book is amassing. So you are agree also that orthotics don't change biomechanics?;)
     
  7. Re: Hoka Ones

    For the last 26+ years, I have based my running shoe recommendation for runners on many factors including running experience, running speed, amount of subtalar joint pronation during running, history of types of injuries, body mass of individual, and types of terrain they typically train on. My goal is to put the runner in as light of a shoe as possible that will allow them to run injury free and be comfortable on the surfaces they train on since I have long known that increased running shoe mass decreases metabolic efficiency.

    [By the way, Mike Catlin and Rudy Dressendorfer, PhD, were friends and running buddies of mine when I was an undergraduate Animal Physiology major at UC Davis from 1975-1979 where I ran on the UC Davis Aggie Cross Country and Track teams for four years and worked in the Human Performance Lab (Catlin MJ, Dressendorfer RH: Effect of shoe weight on the energy cost of running. Medicine and Science in Sports. 11: 80, 1979). I often ran with Mike Catlin before he won the Western States 100 Mile run in 1979 and 1980, in thick soled conventional running shoes....not racing flats!]

    Of course, children and teenagers, due to their lower mass do not need as much of a shoe as do heavier adult runners. I try to tune the running shoe midsole to allow the runner to get some shock absorption from the shoe but also not allowing the shoe to cause excessive subtalar joint pronation.

    My past experience both as a competetive runner and seeing thousands upon thousands of runners over the past 26+ years has shown me quite conclusively that the properly selected conventional running shoe is a very safe shoe to run in and is much more safe to run for the vast majority of adult runners than a thin-soled racing flat on asphalt and concrete especially. For trail runners, a thinner midsole running shoe is better to decrease the lever arm for inversion ankle sprains and since the trail surface itself can offer some natural cushioning to the runner, without the shoe having to provide so much cushioning.

    So Blaise, it comes down to your anecdotes that thin shoes are better always, versus my anecdotes that a variety of running shoe midsole designs can be used depending on many factors. I just can't see that the research evidence justifies the claims you are making.

    However, I do appreciate that you know the research, even though you do have a major fault in making up mystical terms such as "proprioceptive heel strike" and "sensitive heel strike" which have not a shred of scientific research to justify their continued use. Why not move, Blaise, from the mystical arts world and into the world of science when you are trying to describe why 80-90% of the millions of runners in the world willingly and enjoyably choose to heel strike when they run?? Certainly you aren't saying that you are right and these millions of people are wrong in choosing to heel strike when they run....are you??
     
  8. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Active Member

    Re: Hoka Ones

    See you around a beer to speak more about all of this
    Happy holidays
    Blaise
     
  9. Re: Hoka Ones

    Merry Christmas, Blaise.:drinks

    Y'all come back now, ya hear?!

     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 22, 2016
  10. Griff

    Griff Moderator

    Re: Hoka Ones

    Having read Benno's new book, and most of his published articles, I'm pretty certain he has never made the above comment.

    I've been enjoying following the discussion on this thread.
     
  11. Re: Hoka Ones

    Ian:

    Benno Nigg never made the comment that Blaise said he did. In fact, when I lectured with Benno at the University of Calgary in February of 2000, he told me in a conversation that if he didn't wear an orthotic inside his shoes, his knees would hurt with prolonged standing so he knew they had to be doing something.

    Here is what Benno and coauthors did say about custom foot orthoses:

     
  12. Re: Hoka Ones

    was going to post the same thing and went to the paper Kevin posted up below - patients and end of year stuff got in the way and was going to add a comment.


    If Blaise is worried about vertical loading rate and taking off the shoes reduces this then so do some orthotics according to Nigg ;)

    Have a nice Christmas all
     
  13. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Active Member

    The best is to ask to Nigg and read his book again...
    Many times he said

    My opinion: Exception of the inverted orthotics, the biomechanical changes brought upon by corrective plantar orthoses are slight and non-systematic, sometimes opposite to the expected results.

    Interesting lecture on the biomechanical effect of orthotics: Chen-2010, 2009(RS)-Murley, 2008(RS)McMillan, Mundermann-2006, Reilly-2006, Ferber-2005, Kulig-2005, Hertel-2005, Stackhouse-2004, Nawoczenski-2004 et 1999, Laughton-2003, Williams III-2003, Nester-2003, Nigg-2003, 2001 et 1999, Razeghi-2000, Neptune-2000, Reinschmidt-2000, Stacoff-2000 et 2001, Brown-1995

    And for sure Effect of foot orthoses on lower extremity kinetics during running:
    a systematic literature review
    (Andrew McMillan and Craig Payne)
    - we can analyze it together with Craig-

    Eff€ects of foot orthoses on skeletal motion during running (A. Stacoff€ a,e,*, C. Reinschmidt a,c, B.M. Nigg a, A.J. van den Bogert a,d, A. Lundberg b, J. Denoth e, E. Stussi e)

    Abstract
    Objective. To quantify the e€ects of medial foot orthoses on skeletal movements of the calcaneus and tibia during the stance phase in running.
    Design. Kinematic e€ects of medial foot orthoses (anterior, posterior, no support) were tested using skeletal (and shoe) markers at the calcaneus and tibia.
    Background. Previous studies using shoe and skin markers concluded that medially placed orthoses control/reduce foot eversion and tibial rotation. However, it is currently unknown if such orthoses also a€act skeletal motion at the lower extremities.
    Methods. Intracortical Hofman pins with re¯ective marker triads were inserted under standard local anesthetic into the calcaneus and tibia of ®ve healthy male subjects. The three-dimensional tibiocalcaneal rotations were determined using a joint coordinate system approach. Eversion (skeletal and shoe) and tibial rotation were calculated to study the foot orthoses e€ffects.
    Results. Orthotic eff€ects on eversion and tibial rotations were found to be small and unsystematic over all subjects. Di€ferences between the subjects were signifcantly larger (p< 0.01; up to 10°) than between the orthotic conditions (1±4°). Signi®can't orthotic e€ffects across subjects were found only for total internal tibial rotation; p<0.05).
    Conclusions. This in vivo study showed that medially placed foot orthoses did not change tibiocalcaneal movement patterns substantially during the stance phase of running.
     
  14. I think it come back to the definition of Biomechancis - just because bones do or do not move does not mean the device is not changing the Mechanics of the body
     
  15. Blaise:

    You might want to check out what these authors call "foot orthoses". Most podiatrists wouldn't call the medial arch pads these authors used in their study "foot orthoses". Would you??

    Glad to see you couldn't stay away from all of us too long.:rolleyes:
     
  16. Blaise:

    Even, Irene Davis, who also advocates barefoot running and runs barefoot herself, has stated in her previous publications that foot orthoses can positively change the biomechanics of the foot and lower extremity. But how do you wear orthotics if you are barefoot?:rolleyes:

     
  17. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    Articles:
    8
    Confirmation bias's and cherry picking at its best! There are a lot of studies missing from that list. ~50% of the published studies show kinematic changes and the other 50% do not show systematic changes.

    - the "foot orthotics" used in most of those studies bear no resemblance to what people use in clinical practice as foot orthotics
    - in the vast majority of those studies we have absolutely no idea if the subjects used even needed a foot orthotic or what foot type they had
    - they are lab based studies... what do they have to do with clinical outcomes?
     
  18. It is very interesting that Irene Davis and coworkers found that subjects that were instructed to forefoot strike had greater tibial accelerations than when they were rearfoot strikers? And I thought, Blaise, that running on your forefoot was supposed to reduce "shock"?! Very interesting!

    Also, why, when Dan Lieberman speaks of heel striking running, he only speaks of "collisions" whereas he never speaks of the forefoot strikers as having "collisions" with the ground? Does this notice at the bottom of his webpage have anything to do with it?:


     
Loading...

Share This Page