The original idea for bionic shoes (BSs) involves combining the function of unstable foot conditions and the structure of the human plantar. The purpose of this study was to investigate the differences between the normal shoes (NS) and the BS during the stance phases of walking and running. A total of 15 Chinese males from Ningbo University were recruited for this study (age: 24.3 ± 2.01 years; height: 176.25 ± 7.11 cm, body weight (BW): 75.75 ± 8.35 kg). The participants were asked to perform a walking and running task. Statistical parametric mapping (SPM) analysis was used to investigate any differences between NSs and BSs during the walking and running stance phases. The results demonstrated that there were significant differences found (21.23–28.24%, p = 0.040; 84.47–100%, p = 0.017) in hip extension and flexion between the NS and the BS during the walking stance phase. There were no significant differences found in ankle and moment during the running stance phase. Significant differences were found in the rectus femoris (5.29–6.21%; p = 0.047), tibialis anterior (14.37–16.40%; p = 0.038), and medial gastrocnemius (25.55–46.86%; p < 0.001) between the NS and the BS during the walking stance phase. Significant differences were found in rectus femoris (12.83–13.10%, p = 0.049; 15.89–80.19%, p < 0.001), tibialis anterior (15.85–18.31%, p = 0.039; 21.14–24.71%, p = 0.030), medial gastrocnemius (80.70–90.44%; p = 0.007), and lateral gastrocnemius (11.16–27.93%, p < 0.001; 62.20–65.63%, p = 0.032; 77.56–93.45%, p < 0.001) between the NS and the BS during the running stance phase. These findings indicate that BSs are more efficient for muscle control than unstable shoes and maybe suitable for rehabilitation training.

Running-related injuries are common among runners. Recent studies in footwear have shown that designs of shoes can potentially affect sports performance and risk of injury. Bionic shoes combine the functions of barefoot running and foot protection and incorporate traditional unstable structures based on bionic science. The purpose of this study was to investigate ground reaction force (GRF) differences for a 5 km run and how bionic shoes affect GRFs. Sixteen male recreational runners volunteered to participate in this study and finished two 5 km running sessions (a neutral shoe session and a bionic shoe session). Two-way repeated-measures ANOVAs were performed to determine the differences in GRFs. In the analysis of the footwear conditions of runners, bionic shoes showed significant decreases in vertical impulse, peak propulsive force, propulsive impulse, and contact time, while the braking impulse and vertical instantaneous loading rate (VILR) increased significantly compared to the neutral shoes. Main effects for a 5 km run were also observed at vertical GRFs and anterior–posterior GRFs. The increases of peak vertical impact force, vertical average loading rate (VALR), VILR, peak braking force and braking impulse were observed in post-5 km running trials and a reduction in peak propulsive force and propulsive impulse. The interaction effects existed in VILR and contact time. The results suggest that bionic shoes may benefit runners with decreasing injury risk during running. The findings of the present study may help to understand the effects of footwear design during prolonged running, thereby providing valuable information for reducing the risk of running injuries.

Background: Although numerous studies have been conducted to investigate the acute effects of shoe drops on running kinematics and kinetic variables, their effects on muscle forces remain unknown. Thus, the primary aim of this study was to compare the muscle force, kinematics, and kinetic variables of habitually rearfoot runners with heel-to-toe drops of negative 8 mm shoes (minimalist shoes) and positive 9 mm shoes (normal shoes) during the running stance phase by using musculoskeletal modeling and simulation techniques. Methods: Experimental data of lower limb kinematics, ground reaction force, and muscle activation from 16 healthy runners with rearfoot strike patterns were collected and analyzed in OpenSim. Using Matlab, the statistical parameter mapping paired t-test was used to compare the joint angle, moment, and muscle force waveform. Results: The results revealed differences in the sagittal ankle and hip angles and sagittal knee moments between the different heel-to-toe drops of running shoes. Specifically, it showed that the negative 8 mm running shoes led to significantly smaller values than the positive 9 mm running shoes in terms of the angle of ankle dorsiflexion, ankle eversion, knee flexion, hip flexion, and hip internal and hip external rotation. The peak ankle dorsiflexion moment, ankle plantarflexion moment, ankle eversion moment, knee flexion moment, knee abduction moment, and knee internal rotation also decreased obviously with the minimalist running shoes, while the lateral gastrocnemius, Achilleas tendon, and extensor hallucis longus muscles were obviously greater in the minimalist shoes compared to normal shoes. The vastus medialis, vastus lateralis and extensor digitorum longus muscles force were smaller in the minimalist shoes. Conclusions: Runners may shift to a midfoot strike pattern when wearing negative running shoes. High muscle forces in the gastrocnemius lateral, Achilleas tendon, and flexor hallucis longus muscles may also indicate an increased risk of Achilleas tendonitis and ankle flexor injuries.

Kinematics data are primary biomechanical parameters. A principal component analysis (PCA) of waveforms is a statistical approach used to explore patterns of variability in biomechanical curve datasets. Differences in experienced and recreational runners’ kinematic variables are still unclear. The purpose of the present study was to compare any differences in kinematics parameters for competitive runners and recreational runners using principal component analysis in the sagittal plane, frontal plane and transverse plane. Forty male runners were divided into two groups: twenty competitive runners and twenty recreational runners. A Vicon Motion System (Vicon Metrics Ltd., Oxford, UK) captured three-dimensional kinematics data during running at 3.3 m/s. The principal component analysis was used to determine the dominating variation in this model. Then, the principal component scores retained the first three principal components and were analyzed using independent t-tests. The recreational runners were found to have a smaller dorsiflexion angle, initial dorsiflexion contact angle, ankle inversion, knee adduction, range motion in the frontal knee plane and hip frontal plane. The running kinematics data were influenced by running experience. The findings from the study provide a better understanding of the kinematics variables for competitive and recreational runners. Thus, these findings might have implications for reducing running injury and improving running performance.