Use of Video Gait Analysis in Running Shoe Stores

I wish I had time to answer this in depth

1) I haven't seen any retailer truly analysing a runners gait, with video, in store - I highly doubt anyone could just observing the pos perspective of foot/ankle whilst shod. They will advertise as such but they don't. But the demand for 'Gait Analysis' requires the retailer to provide what the customer perceives to be ‘Gait Analysis’, rightly or wrongly it is commercial pressure, rather like retailers having to sell 'Barefoot' running shoes. The customer gets what the customers wants!

2) All I have ever seen is what I will call here 'Video Proofing' – the specialist goes through his normal fiiting process, provide a few options, the customer would decide which one fitted the best in terms of Fit & Comfort The customer jumps on the treadmill and then sees the shoe in action for themselves. Some retailers do not have a scobby what they are looking for. Some do. It is however a great tool to show the customer whether the sole unit is working for then, and/or the upper has integrity required.

3) What worries me that some'Technical Reps' use the angle tool to measuring the heel counters position (apparent 87 degrees is good), as I am sure you may remember a well known brand was advertising the 'allowed' amount of pronation' was ‘x’ degree.

The danger, unfortunately, is that the majority of reatilers advertise 'Gait Analysis' but they are just videoing their customers in the shoe to see if it is okay. The Public don't know or care to know what the differnce is.

I have a video camera but I am not George Lucas

 

So do I, as every time I ask the questions I can never get a straight answer.

Don't have to look too hard....there are plenty in Sydney alone.

But what does that actually mean in terms of reference? Where do you use that 87 degrees number to work out what shoe is good for an individual.

 

Hi Johnathon,

I do see your point and scepticism and my clinical knowledge and experience tells me that you can't use treadmill gait analysis as the be all and end all in assessment. However in relation to footwear wouldn't you rather a patient of yours having advice on the shoe they purchase instead of selecting their new runners because they like the colour etc? Realistically when purchaing a shoe without professional advice most people look at 2-3 things: Cost $$$, Brand and how it looks. I have seen people select inferior quality shoes because they preferred the colour.

Also, I guess you are right to a degree about the barefoot analysis being used as a selling tool. However, it is a handy tool to have to show the client/patient etc their gait and use it to explain their foot type. Some retailers, I am sure, are using this technique and system to "see if a shoe is ok" but not all stores. As I said in my previous post; there are some stores around hiring podiatrists or final year students to educate their clients. The end result is to sell a shoe, that is their job, but having that clinical back ground means you would never sell a shoe at the risk of your patient developing an injury.

Cheers.

 

igs:

Really?

 

I have personally conducted over 2000 sportsanalysis, both static and dynamic. It surprises me constantly how often the client departs from the static perspective. People seem to need a dynamic feedback on the shoes they plan to be dynamic in, wether it´s running or walking. More work for you, but it is truly deserved - if your clients plan to walk/ run.

- Ole Sørnes Askvik -

 

What a lot of the running shops do is look for any amount of rear foot eversion, then address the movement as a negative aspect of gait to the customer , then slam on a shoe with higher lever of support to show how it appears to decrease eversion on viewing slow motion .

P.S they almost always start with a unstable shoe first (nike pegasus ect) to get the full effect of the trainer doing something (in thier eyes anyway)

 

So they should start in the other end? With the most supported one?
I´ve met several podiatrists that takes a measure of the foot (person is sitting) - and after three weeks a sole is finished - and he/she is told "Go buy some good shoes." From my point of view it´s rather more honest to stay in touch with the patient until he/she get the right shoes.

Have you ever bought glasses? They use the same progress, only with different lenses. Why? Because it is the most adecvat way to do it. If you where suppost to find the weight of a small elephant - you would probably not put the little elephants father on the other weight, just to ensure that he is more heavy.

Enjoy your holiday!

 

I suppose the use of a dynamic and static harris mat reading could also be a good medium. Tread mills just cost more and leave no hard copy map to work with. There are other computer programs which give "hot spot " readings.. and department store marketing strategies from companies that give a diagnosis without visually seeing the patient and applying visual observations to the gait, stride and the GRF apparent at midstance. The workers in these stores become diagnosers and script fulfillers all in one from external findings only and not from a more comprehensive study. I feel it is so important to have allied medical team members work in concert to the doctors script for the best outcome..That is why we have become educated and certified in our area of expertise to start with...
I have seen runners with over suppinator shoes on that were inappropriate for there running style and biomechanics. This became apparent after watching the runner run on a sidewalk with valleys and rills. This may be a small showing of wrong fit after a treadmill hard sell... yet the potential is there.
The treadmill does not include the foot type only arch movement as I understand what is being done in the running stores.
I hope the black box is found so we can all learn from what the tread mill is suppose to do and mimick. I suppose used properly the treadmill has a great potential..

 

Hi i'm a fresh grad with a bachelor of sports & outdoor. I'm currently working at a local performance footwear company as technical specialist to train my retail staffs and as well as handle complains from customers about poor shoe fitting & pain. Although i'm working in a footwear company but i'm very academical and open to all opinions plus I'm an avid marathoner trying to qualify for Boston and very keen in LL injury.

I must admit that before i joined this company their approach was to merely sell the shoes. Hence they roped me in to change this concept and the following is my protocol for the shop:

Currently apart from finding PHMx, existing c/o, social Hx, i do exam their knee type (genu varum/valgum). i'm also using LAA (130-150degree for normality) & Navicular Drop test (<1cm for normality) in single leg squat for static tests and my shop has this ING podometer like 'Wet Test' to capture footprint & any signs of forefoot varus/valgus, Morton's foot,peasant, egyptian etc.

I'm getting a treadmill with video analysis software to capture STJ movement. I know the debate b/w treadmill running vs road running but however it is the closest we can capture for dynamic testing for the specificity reason. i.e. someone with pes cavus during static & walking can over pronate in running gait due crossing of midline.

Hence i would like to hear exp. pods and shoe companies their constructive view on my protocol? what can be improve? This is a good platform for my learning stage as i'm hoping to save enough to do another degree in podiatry.

I have been reading this great thread and it is good for podiatrists & footwear companies to share exp. and to learn fr each other, despite differences in perspective but ultimately our aim is to ensure our pt/consumer to get the most appropriate running shoes safe.

 

Craig,

In your study (at the start of this thread) are you able to let me know what shoes you use exactly, i.e. make and model.

I am curently testing a new camera and I thought it might be interesting to record the exact same shoes using high speed and then post them on youtube for everyone to see in slow mo.

I am currently interested in whether the upper and sole unit work together, and how the sole unit behaves/reacts in relationship to the foot.

 

I just had some extra time to look at this thread. There are some interesting parts to the thread but don't have time to comment on them all. However, I do have a few comments regarding running gait analysis and running shoe selection since this is one of the subjects I often lecture and do workshops on.

1. I prefer overground gait analysis with my own eyes versus video analysis on a treadmill for my clinical setup. Many people do run differently on a treadmill versus overground, especially if they are not accustomed to running on a treadmill. If someone injures themselves by falling off your treadmill, then you are liable...no doubt about that. Even though the treadmill and video analysis systems are good for some clinics, and do allow the patient to see their own gait, I prefer to not use them in my own clinic, but have only used them while teaching at the podiatry school over the past quarter century.

2. I recommend running shoe stores to not use treadmill analysis but rather to train their staff to analyze customers while running overground. I have worked very closely with Fleet Feet Running Shoe Store for the past 20+ years doing "free screenings' on a monthly basis.[Fleet Feet is a nationwide chain of running shoe stores that started here in Sacramento in 1974 when I was a high school senior distance runner here in Sacramento.] I have always told the owners of Fleet Feet that using treadmills adds extra expense and liability to their gait analysis process and that it is better to either analyze them running in the store or on the sidewalk outside the store. Overground gait analysis is only a one to two minute process in this busy store and when running gait analysis is conducted outdoors on the sidewalk in front of the store, this draws attention to the store from pedestrians and cars driving by. When I am at the store doing my "free screenings", I often work with the sales staff to teach them foot anatomy, gait analysis techniques, and typical running injury treatments, in addition to explaining my rationale for shoe recommendations. I believe this type of relationship is a "win-win" for both the sports podiatrist and the running shoe store and is an excellent way for a young sports podiatrist to generate more customers for their own practice by the extra exposure it gives them to the runners of the community.

3. The running gait analysis is a critical part of the evaluation process that allows the podiatrist to best determine what the most likely biomechanical etiology of the runner's injury. In addition, the running gait analysis process in a running shoe store, in the hands of capable sales people, is one of the best ways for the sales people to objectively determine what might be the best shoe for the customer by comparing their running biomechanics in different shoe types. Even though these shoe sales people are not podiatrists, they are very interested in learning about gait analysis techniques and are often very good at doing gait analysis because they are truly interested in trying to help their customers obtain the best running shoe for their own particular biomechanics and running habits. For the most part, the recommendations I see coming from the more experienced shoe salesmen are very good in the majority of instances.

4. The wrong running shoe can easily cause injury in many runners. The criteria I use in recommending running shoes is:

A) shoe fit
B) body weight
C) running speed and intensity
D) foot and lower extremity biomechanics during running
E) running injury history
F) type of surfaces normally run on (i.e. roads vs trails)
G) whether the shoe will be used for training, road racing or track racing
H) whether foot orthoses will be used in the shoe or not.

One of the most common shoe selection problems I see is that the running shoes are not always being matched to the runner's body weight. For example, the 105 pound female runner with a pronated foot may do extremely well in a neutral running shoe with a over-the-counter orthosis or custom orthosis or in a light stability shoe with no orthosis inside the shoe. However, the 210 pound male runner with the pronated foot may need the most "beefy" motion control running shoe available with a good anti-pronation foot orthosis inside the shoe to prevent running injuries.

The mechanical analogy for this shoe selection process that I often use when explaining the process to podiatrists or shoe sales people is to compare it to tuning the stiffness in the springs of a pickup truck to the load being carried in the bed of the truck. When the truck is unloaded (i.e. light runner) the rear axle springs must be more compliant so that small bumps on the road are not transmitted as large "bumps" that are felt in the cab of the truck. When the truck is loaded with a full load (i.e. heavy runner) the rear axle spring must be more stiff to that the springs aren't "bottomed out" (i.e. spring coils touching each other) so that when small bumps in the road are encountered by the truck, the springs aren't bottomed out allowing large "bumps" to be felt in the cab of the truck.

In other words, the light runner needs a softer-soled shoe with less midsole durometer to allow them to have optimum midsole compression which allows the foot to depress into the midsole more than they would be able to by running in a shoe with a higher durometer midsole construction (i.e. motion control or stability construction). In addition, the heavier runner needs a harder-soled shoe with higher midsole durometer to allow them to have optimal midsole compression which allows their foot to depress into the midsole less than they would if they were running in a lower durometer midsole midsole construction (i.e. light stability or neutral construction). Of course, these are rather simplistic analogies of a complex process, but it seems to hold true in the vast majority of runners who I have helped with the running shoe fit process over the past 30 years.