Central European Journal of Sport Sciences and Medicine


ISSN: 2300-9705     eISSN: 2353-2807    OAI    DOI: 10.18276/cej.2016.4-08
CC BY-SA   Open Access   DOAJ  DOAJ

Issue archive / Vol. 16, No. 4/2016
Effects of Energy Boost and Springblade Footwear on Running Economy and Substrate Oxidation

Authors: Jonathan Sinclair
Centre for Applied Sport and Exercise Sciences, School of Sport and Wellbeing, College of Health and Wellbeing, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, Lancashire, UK

Stephanie Dillon
International Institute of Nutritional Sciences and Applied Food Safety Studies, School of Sport and Wellbeing, College of Health and Wellbeing, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, Lancashire, UK
Keywords: Running VO2 economy footwear
Whole issue publication date:2016
Page range:8 (77-84)
Cited-by (Crossref) ?:

Abstract

The current study aimed to investigate the influence of energy boost, spring and conventional footwear on running economy and substrate usage. Ten male runners completed 5 min steady state runs in energy boost, spring and conventional footwear. Running economy and percent contribution of carbohydrate to total calorie expenditure were assessed. Participants also subjectively indicated which shoe condition they preferred for running. Differences between footwear were examined using repeated measures ANOVA. The results showed firstly that running economy was significantly improved in the energy return (33.36 ml.kg.min -1) compared to spring (34.83 ml.kg.min -1) and conventional footwear (34.65 ml.kg.min -1). In addition, percent carbohydrate was significantly lower in the energy return (74.51%) in comparison to the spring (78.56%) and conventional (78.52%) footwear. As running economy was improved and carbohydrate utilization reduced in the energy return footwear, this study indicates that they may be associated with improvements in running performance.
Download file

Article file

Bibliography

1.Bosco, C., Rusko, H. (1983). The effect of prolonged skeletal muscle stretch-shortening cycle on recoil of elastic energy and on energy expenditure. Acta Physiologica Scandinavica, 119, 219–224.
2.Frederick, E.C., Howley, E.T., Powers, S.K. (1986). Lower oxygen demands of running in soft-soled shoes. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 57, 174–177.
3.Gruber, A.H., Umberger, B.R., Braun, B., Hamill, J. (2013). Economy and rate of carbohydrate oxidation during running with rearfoot and forefoot strike patterns. Journal of Applied Physiology, 115, 194–201.
4.Hanson, N.J., Berg, K., Deka, P., Meendering, J.R., Ryan, C. (2010). Oxygen Cost of Running Barefoot vs. Running Shod. International Journal of Sports Medicine, 32, 401–406.
5.Jones, A. (2006). The physiology of the world record holder for the women’s marathon. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 1, 101–116.
6.Luo, G., Stergiou, P., Worobets, J., Nigg, B., Stefanyshyn, D. (2009). Improved footwear comfort reduces oxygen consumption during running. Footwear Science, 1, 25–29.
7.McArdle, W.D., Katch, F.I., Katch, V.L. (2010). Exercise physiology: nutrition, energy, and human performance. Philadelphia PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
8.Mündermann, A., Nigg, B.M., Stefanyshyn, D.J., Humble, R.N. (2002). Development of a reliable method to assess footwear comfort during running. Gait & Posture, 16, 38–45.
9.Nigg, B.M., Stefanyshyn, D., Cole, G., Stergiou, P., Miller, J. (2003). The effect of material characteristics of shoe soles on muscle activation and energy aspects during running. Journal of Biomechanics, 36, 569–575.
10.Rapoport, B.I. (2010). Metabolic factors limiting performance in marathon runners. PLoS One Computational Biology, 6, 1–13.
11.Sinclair, J., Taylor, P.J., Hobbs, S.J. (2013). Alpha level adjustments for multiple dependent variable analyses and their applicability – a review. International Journal of Sports Science & Engineering, 7, 17–20.
12.Sinclair, J., Taylor, P.J., Edmundson, C.J., Brooks, D., Hobbs, S.J. (2014). The influence of footwear kinetic, kinematic and electromyographical parameters on the energy requirements of steady state running. Movement & Sports Sciences, 80, 39–49.
13.Sinclair, J., Franks, C., Goodwin, J.F., Naemi, R., Chockalingam, N. (2014). Influence of footwear designed to boost energy return on the kinetics and kinematics of running compared to conventional running shoes. Comparative Exercise Physiology, 10, 199–206.
14.Sinclair, J., Mcgrath, R., Brook, O., Taylor, P. J., Dillon, S. (2015). Influence of footwear designed to boost energy return on running economy in comparison to a conventional running shoe. Journal of Sports Sciences, 34, 1094–1098.
15.Sinclair, J., Shore, H., Dillon, S. (2016). The effect of minimalist, maximalist and energy return footwear of equal mass on running economy and substrate utilisation. Comparative Exercise Physiology, 12, 49–54.
16.Sinclair, J., Dillon, S. The influence of energy return and spring footwear on the kinetics and kinematics of running. Human Movement (in press).
17.Williams, K.R., Cavanagh, P.R. (1987). Relationship between distance running mechanics, running economy, and performance. Journal of Applied Physiology, 63, 1236–1245.
18.Worobets, J., Wannop, J.W., Tomaras, E., Stefanyshyn, D. (2014). Softer and more resilient running shoe cushioning properties enhance running economy. Footwear Science, 6, 147–153.