Quantitative Analysis of the Kinematics of the Foot During Gait With Respect to Barefoot Running Shoes Using a Multi-Segment Foot Model

Kinematics of the foot during static and dynamic tasks are technically challenging to accurately measure, making it difficult to evaluate their contribution to running-related injuries. Motion capture can detect changes in running mechanics, such as with differing footwear. Habitual barefoot runners and/habitual minimalist shoe runners underwent a biomechanical evaluation of their foot movement during running using reflective markers and optical motion capture. A five-segment foot model was used to compare motions between the different parts of the foot while running barefoot and wearing Vibram Five Fingers™ (VFF) barefoot mimicking shoes. Supination/pronation in the forefoot was larger but not significant between habitual shod and habitual VFF runners. In contrast, the other foot motions (forefoot spreading/rising, hindfoot pronation/supination and hindfoot adduction/abduction) were not significantly different between the groups of runners. Therefore it could be possible that transitioning from a regular running shoe to a barefoot mimicking minimalist shoe would cause the foot to adopt a more supinated gait cycle.

Keywords: Foot; biomechanics; multi-segment analysis; motion analysis; kinematics; shoe; motion capture

Year	Entry
1998	Andriacchi TP, Alexander EJ, Toney MK, Dyrby C, Sum J. A point cluster method for in vivo motion analysis: applied to a study of knee kinematics. J Biomech Eng. December 1998;120(6):743-749.
1992	van Mechelen W. Running injuries: a review of the epidemiological literature. Sports Med. November 1992;14(5):320-335.
2010	Jenkyn TR, Shultz R, Giffin JR, Birmingham TB. A comparison of subtalar joint motion during anticipated medial cutting turns and level walking using a multi-segment foot model. Gait Post. February 2010;31(2):153-158.
1996	Cappozzo A, Catani F, Leardini A, Benedetti M, Della Croce U. Position and orientation in space of bones during movement: experimental artefacts. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). March 1996;11(2):90-100.
2005	Leardini A, Chiari L, Della Croce U, Cappozzo A. Human movement analysis using stereophotogrammetry, III: soft tissue artifact assessment and compensation. Gait Post. February 2005;21(2):212-225.
1985	Dickinson JA, Cook SD, Leinhardt TM. The measurement of shock waves following heel strike while running. J Biomech. 1985;18(6):415-422.
2002	Taunton JE, Ryan MB, Clement DB, McKenzie DC, Lloyd-Smith DR, Zumbo BD. A retrospective case-control analysis of 2002 running injuries. Br J Sports Med. April 2002;36(2):95-101.
2010	Lieberman DE, Venkadesan M, Werbel WA, Daoud AI, D’Andrea S, Davis IS, Mang’Eni RO, Pitsiladis Y. Foot strike patterns and collision forces in habitually barefoot versus shod runners. Nature. January 28, 2010;463(7280):531-535.
1986	Nigg BM, Bahlsen AH, Denoth J, Luethi SM, Stacoff A. Factors influencing kinetic and kinematic variables in running. In: Nigg BM, ed. Biomechanics of Running Shoes. Champaign, IL: Inc., Human Kinetics Publishers; 1986:139-159.
2012	Shultz R, Jenkyn T. Determining the maximum diameter for holes in the shoe without compromising shoe integrity when using a multi-segment foot model. Med Eng Phys. January 2012;34(1):118-122.
2000	Hreljac A, Marshall RN, Hume PA. Evaluation of lower extremity overuse injury potential in runners. Med Sci Sports Exer. September 2000;32(9):1635-1641.
2007	Jenkyn TR, Nicol AC. A multi-segment kinematic model of the foot with a novel definition of forefoot motion for use in clinical gait analysis during walking. J Biomech. 2007;40(14):3271-3278.
1964	Mann R, Inman VT. Phasic activity of intrinsic muscles of the foot. J Bone Joint Surg. April 1964;46A(3):469-481.
1997	Reinschmidt C, van den Bogert AJ, Lundberg A, Nigg BM, Murphy N, Stacoff A, Stano A. Tibiofemoral and tibiocalcaneal motion during walking: external vs. skeletal markers. Gait Post. October 1997;6(2):98-109.
2006	Milner CE, Ferber R, Pollard CD, Hamill J, Davis IS. Biomechanical factors associated with tibial stress fracture in female runners. Med Sci Sports Exer. February 2006;38(2):323-328.
2007	van Gent RN, Siem D, van Middelkoop M, van Os AG, Bierma-Zeinstra SMA, Koes BW. Incidence and determinants of lower extremity running injuries in long distance runners: a systematic review. Br J Sports Med. August 2007;41(8):469-480.
2000	Stacoff A, Nigg BM, Reinschmidt C, van den Bogert AJ, Lundberg A. Tibiocalcaneal kinematics of barefoot versus shod running. J Biomech. 2000;33(11):1387-1395.
1990	Areblad M, Nigg BM, Ekstrand J, Olsson KO, Ekström H. Three-dimensional measurement of rearfoot motion during running. J Biomech. 1990;23(9):933-940.
1978	James SL, Bates BT, Osternig LR. Injuries to runners. Am J Sports Med. 1978;6(2):40-50.

Year

Entry

1998

Andriacchi TP, Alexander EJ, Toney MK, Dyrby C, Sum J. A point cluster method for in vivo motion analysis: applied to a study of knee kinematics. J Biomech Eng. December 1998;120(6):743-749.

1992

van Mechelen W. Running injuries: a review of the epidemiological literature. Sports Med. November 1992;14(5):320-335.

2010

Jenkyn TR, Shultz R, Giffin JR, Birmingham TB. A comparison of subtalar joint motion during anticipated medial cutting turns and level walking using a multi-segment foot model. Gait Post. February 2010;31(2):153-158.

1996

Cappozzo A, Catani F, Leardini A, Benedetti M, Della Croce U. Position and orientation in space of bones during movement: experimental artefacts. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). March 1996;11(2):90-100.

2005

Leardini A, Chiari L, Della Croce U, Cappozzo A. Human movement analysis using stereophotogrammetry, III: soft tissue artifact assessment and compensation. Gait Post. February 2005;21(2):212-225.