REF-1106 · Kasmer et al., 2013 · International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, · Paper · PubMed
At 8.1 km of a mid-size city marathon (1991 runners classified), 93.67% were heel strikers; foot-strike class differed with race position (Kruskal-Wallis P <.0001), with faster runners less likely to heel strike, and it did not differ by gender
Foot strike (forefoot, midfoot, heel or split), gender and rank (position in race) were recorded at the 8.1-km mark for 2112 runners; 1991 could be classified.
Participants
n=1991 classified of 2112 recorded runners, 2011 Milwaukee Lakefront Marathon.
Protocol
Classification at 8.1 km; Kruskal-Wallis test for foot strike vs rank, Fisher exact test for foot strike vs gender.
Key Results
Heel-strike prevalence 93.67% (n = 1865).
Foot-strike class differed with performance (P < .0001); more elite performers were less likely to heel strike.
No significant association between foot-strike class and gender.
In the 126 non-heel strikers, shoe wear was not associated with performance.
Authors' view (not tested in this study): the heel-strike prevalence may predict these runners' injury profile.
Practical Application
Inference: in an uninjured recreational runner a heel strike alone is not a fault; the authors see a role for modification in injured runners.
The injury link in the conclusion is the authors' extrapolation; no injuries were recorded. Not from this paper; the base's own practice: injury risk is reasoned from load and history, not from strike pattern alone (see REF-714 for the impact-force argument).
Limitations
Single observation at 8.1 km; pattern later in the race not recorded.
"Rank" is position in race; finish times and pace not analysed in the abstract.
No injury, kinetic or economy data; the injury claim is speculative.
How this entry was checked and changed
Why this level
cross-sectional race video; one point early in the race, rank not finish time