Background

Running biomechanics is considered an important determinant of running economy (RE). However, studies examining associations between running biomechanics and RE report inconsistent findings.

Objective

The aim of this systematic review was to determine associations between running biomechanics and RE and explore potential causes of inconsistency.

Methods

Three databases were searched and monitored up to April 2023. Observational studies were included if they (i) examined associations between running biomechanics and RE, or (ii) compared running biomechanics between groups differing in RE, or (iii) compared RE between groups differing in running biomechanics during level, constant-speed, and submaximal running in healthy humans (18–65 years). Risk of bias was assessed using a modified tool for observational studies and considered in the results interpretation using GRADE. Meta-analyses were performed when two or more studies reported on the same outcome. Meta-regressions were used to explore heterogeneity with speed, coefficient of variation of height, mass, and age as continuous outcomes, and standardization of running shoes, oxygen versus energetic cost, and correction for resting oxygen or energy cost as categorical outcomes.

Results

Fifty-one studies (n = 1115 participants) were included. Most spatiotemporal outcomes showed trivial and non-significant associations with RE: contact time r = − 0.02 (95% confidence interval [CI] − 0.15 to 0.12); flight time r = 0.11 (− 0.09 to 0.32); stride time r = 0.01 (− 0.8 to 0.50); duty factor r = − 0.06 (− 0.18 to 0.06); stride length r = 0.12 (− 0.15 to 0.38), and swing time r = 0.12 (− 0.13 to 0.36). A higher cadence showed a small significant association with a lower oxygen/energy cost (r = − 0.20 [− 0.35 to − 0.05]). A smaller vertical displacement and higher vertical and leg stiffness showed significant moderate associations with lower oxygen/energy cost (r = 0.35, − 0.31, − 0.28, respectively). Ankle, knee, and hip angles at initial contact, midstance or toe-off as well as their range of motion, peak vertical ground reaction force, mechanical work variables, and electromyographic activation were not significantly associated with RE, although potentially relevant trends were observed for some outcomes.

Conclusions

Running biomechanics can explain 4–12% of the between-individual variation in RE when considered in isolation, with this magnitude potentially increasing when combining different variables. Implications for athletes, coaches, wearable technology, and researchers are discussed in the review.

Protocol registration

https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/293ND (OpenScience Framework).

中文翻译：

---

跑步生物力学与跑步经济之间的关系：观察研究的系统回顾和荟萃分析

背景

跑步生物力学被认为是跑步经济性（RE）的重要决定因素。然而，研究跑步生物力学和跑步运动之间的关联的研究报告了不一致的结果。

客观的

本次系统评价的目的是确定跑步生物力学与 RE 之间的关联，并探讨不一致的潜在原因。

方法

截至 2023 年 4 月，对三个数据库进行了检索和监测。如果观察性研究 (i) 检查跑步生物力学与 RE 之间的关联，或 (ii) 比较 RE 不同组之间的跑步生物力学，或 (iii) 比较 RE 不同组之间的 RE，则纳入观察性研究。健康人（18-65 岁）在水平、恒速和次最大跑步过程中的跑步生物力学。使用改良的观察性研究工具评估偏倚风险，并使用 GRADE 在结果解释中考虑偏倚风险。当两项或多项研究报告相同结果时进行荟萃分析。元回归用于探索异质性，其中速度、身高、体重和年龄的变异系数作为连续结果，跑鞋的标准化、氧气与能量成本以及静息氧气或能量成本的校正作为分类结果。

结果

 纳入了51 项研究（n = 1115 名参与者）。大多数时空结果显示与 RE 无关且不显着的关联：接触时间r  = − 0.02（95% 置信区间 [CI] − 0.15 至 0.12）；飞行时间r  = 0.11（− 0.09 至 0.32）；步幅时间r  = 0.01（− 0.8 至 0.50）；占空比r  = − 0.06（− 0.18 至 0.06）；步幅r  = 0.12（− 0.15 至 0.38），摆动时间r  = 0.12（− 0.13 至 0.36）。较高的踏频与较低的氧气/能量消耗存在较小的显着关联（r  = − 0.20 [− 0.35 至 − 0.05]）。较小的垂直位移以及较高的垂直和腿部刚度显示出与较低的氧气/能量成本显着的中度关联（分别为r  = 0.35、− 0.31、− 0.28）。尽管观察到了潜在的相关趋势，但初始接触、中间站立或脚趾离地时的踝关节、膝关节和髋关节角度以及它们的运动范围、峰值垂直地面反作用力、机械功变量和肌电图激活与 RE 没有显着相关。对于某些结果。

结论

当单独考虑时，跑步生物力学可以解释 RE 个体间差异的 4-12%，当组合不同变量时，这一幅度可能会增加。评论中讨论了对运动员、教练、可穿戴技术和研究人员的影响。

协议注册

https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/293ND（开放科学框架）。