Processing math: 100%
Skip main navigation

Cookies Notification

We use cookies on this site to enhance your user experience. By continuing to browse the site, you consent to the use of our cookies. Learn More
×

System Upgrade on Tue, May 28th, 2024 at 2am (EDT)

Existing users will be able to log into the site and access content. However, E-commerce and registration of new users may not be available for up to 12 hours.
For online purchase, please visit us again. Contact us at customercare@wspc.com for any enquiries.

SEARCH GUIDE  Download Search Tip PDF File

  • articleOpen Access

    BIOMECHANICAL INFLUENCE OF RUNNING SHOES WITH MIDSOLE HOLLOW STRUCTURE ON LOWER LIMBS DURING RUNNING

    The objective was to investigate the effects of running shoes with midsole hollow structure span and height on the biomechanics of the lower limbs during running. We collected 21 adults with running habits who wore two pairs of running shoes with different midsole hollow structures and ran at a speed of 3.3m/s on a force-measuring treadmill. The lower limb kinematics, ground reaction force (GRF) and lower limb muscle activation characteristics were simultaneously captured by a motion capture system, a 3D force treadmill, and a surface electromyography (sEMG) system. Paired t-tests were performed on data for the two shoe conditions that fit the normal distribution assumptions; otherwise, Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used. The statistical parameter mapping (SPM) technology was used for the analysis of 1D parameters of kinematic, dynamic, and sEMG activation characteristics. The result showed that the time to the peak impact force at touchdown of Hollow shoe2 was significantly increased (P<0.01), the maximum loading rate (P<0.01) and average loading rate (P<0.05) were significantly reduced, braking time (P<0.05), push time (P<0.05), contact time (P<0.01) of Hollow shoe2 were significantly increased compared with Hollow shoe1. Hollow shoe2 push phase of the tibialis anterior muscle activation characteristics was significantly lower (SPM, P<0.05) than Hollow shoe1. Our conclusion is that running shoes offer the solution as they have the advantage of the complex structure of the hollow midsole.