The purpose of the study was to determine the effects of shoe outsole design on maximum vertical acceleration and select kinematic parameters during level and uphill walking across phases of stance. Twelve participants, 7 males (75.1±9.3 kg, 173.6±3.6 cm, 22.9±3.5 yrs) and 5 females (56.5±5.1 kg, 158.3±4.5 cm, 25.4±11.1 yrs) granted written consent and preferred walking speed was determined. An accelerometer (480 Hz) was attached to the distal leg to measure maximum leg acceleration (Aleg) and an electrogoniometer (480 Hz) was placed on the back to measure sagittal lumbar motion (LumbarROM). Sagittal video capture (60 Hz) included thigh range of motion (Thigh_ROM), knee range of motion (Knee_ROM) and ankle range of motion (AnkleROM). Participants walked on a treadmill in each of four randomized conditions:​ 1) Rounded outsole shoe (ROS) at 0% incline, 2) Traditional outsole shoe (TOS) at 0% incline, 3) ROS at 5% incline and 4) TOS at 5% incline. Participants walked at 10% greater than preferred pace. Data were obtained from five consecutive gait cycles. For each gait cycle, stance was normalized to 100%. Stance phase was further divided into Phase I, II, and III. Data analysis included a 2 (shoe) x 2 (incline) repeated measure ANOVA (α=0.05) for A_LEG, LumbarROM, Thigh_ROM, Knee_ROM, and AnkleROM at each phase of stance (Phase I, II, and III). Post hoc paired t-Tests were performed for significant interaction. Results show seven of the fifteen dependent variables for shoe differed significantly (p<0.05) across grade. Four of the fifteen dependent variables for grade differed significantly (p<0.05) across shoe. There was a significant interaction between shoe and grade for Knee_ROM during Phase II. Post hoc t-Tests revealed significantly lesser Knee_ROM for TOS (10.39 ± 4.45°) compared to ROS (11.76 ± 4.09°) at 5% incline (t=3.296, p=.007) and significantly lesser Knee_ROM between 0% (12.97 ± 5.73°) and 5%(10.39 ± 4.45°) incline for TOS (t=2.226, p=.048). It was anticipated that there would be kinematic differences between incline conditions. Overall, ROS was not different from TOS in sagittal lumbar kinematics. Differences between footwear types included significantly greater Thigh_ROM for TOS compared to ROS during Phase I. Also, there was significantly lesser A_LEGin TOS compared to ROS, significantly lesser Knee_ROM in TOS compared to ROS at 5% incline only, and significantly greater AnkleROM for TOS compared to ROS during Phase II. In Phase III, only AnkleROM was significantly greater for TOS compared to ROS. It appears that during Phase II, the first half of single leg stance, is where the majority of differences occur due to apex of ROS.