Previous studies have used accelerometers with various operating ranges (ORs) when measuring biomechanical parameters. However, it is still unclear whether ORs influence the accuracy of running parameters, and whether the different stiffnesses of footwear midsoles influence this accuracy. The purpose of the present study was to systematically investigate the influence of OR on the accuracy of stride length, running velocity, and on peak tibial acceleration. Twenty-one recreational heel strike runners ran on a 15-m indoor track at self-selected running speeds in three footwear conditions (low to high midsole stiffness). Runners were equipped with an inertial measurement unit (IMU) affixed to the heel cup of the right shoe and with a uniaxial accelerometer at the right tibia. Accelerometers (at the tibia and included in the IMU) with a high OR of ±70 g were used as the reference and the data were cut at ±32, ±16, and at ±8 g in post-processing, before calculating parameters. The results show that the OR influenced the outcomes of all investigated parameters, which were not influenced by tested footwear conditions. The lower ORs were associated with an underestimation error for all biomechanical parameters, which increased noticeably with a decreasing OR. It can be concluded that accelerometers with a minimum OR of ±32 g should be used to avoid inaccurate measurements.

Footwear properties can influence physiological and biomechanical variables, which may lead to positive changes in distance running performance. One innovative development in running shoe technology is adding carbon fiber plates to increase midsole bending stiffness. However, there are only a few studies investigating the influence of shoe conditions on both physiological and biomechanical variables, simultaneously, when running for longer than 5 min or for distances > 1 km. Hence, the purpose of the current study was to investigate the influence of different running shoe concepts with carbon fiber plates on physiological and biomechanical parameters during a 10 km treadmill run. Twenty-three athletes participated in the study, which comprised four measurement days for each subject. On the first day, subjects performed a treadmill exhaustion test to determine maximum oxygen uptake. On the second, third, and fourth days, each subject ran 10 km at 70% of their maximum oxygen uptake in one of three shoe models. Significant differences were found between the shoe conditions for the biomechanical parameters, but not for the physiological parameters. It seems that runners adjusted their running styles to the shoe conditions during the 10 km run to reduce the load on the lower extremities without compromising their endurance performance. These results may have practical implications for runners, coaches, and shoe manufacturers.

Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) may affect movement even years after surgery. The purpose of this study was to determine possible interlimb asymmetries due to ACLR when running on a treadmill and in field conditions, with the aim of contributing to the establishment of objective movement assessment in real-world settings; moreover, we aimed to gain knowledge on recovered ACLR as a biomechanical risk factor. Eight subjects with a history of unilateral ACLR 5.4 ± 2.8 years after surgery and eight healthy subjects ran 1 km on a treadmill and 1 km on a concrete track. The ground contact time and triaxial peak tibial accelerations were recorded using inertial measurement units. Interlimb differences within subjects were tested and compared between conditions. There were no significant differences between limbs in the ACLR subjects or in healthy runners for any of the chosen parameters on both running surfaces. However, peak tibial accelerations were higher during field running (p-values < 0.01; Cohen’s d effect sizes > 0.8), independent of health status. To minimize limb loading due to higher impacts during field running, this should be considered when choosing a running surface, especially in rehabilitation or when running with a minor injury or health issues.

Foot rollover and the ‘ride’ feeling that occurs during heel–toe transition during running have been investigated mostly in laboratory settings due to the technical requirements of ‘golden standard’ measurement devices. Hence, the purpose of the current study was to investigate ‘ride’ and rollover with a heel cap-mounted inertial measurement unit (IMU) when running under field conditions to get realistic results. Twenty athletes ran on a 1 km outdoor track with five different shoe conditions, only differing in their midsole bending stiffness. The peak angular velocity (PAV) in the sagittal plane of the shoe was analyzed. The subjective evaluation of the ‘ride’ perception during heel–toe transition was rated on a visual analogue scale. The results revealed that PAV and ‘ride’ varied for the different shoes. The regression analysis showed that PAV has a significant impact on the ‘ride’ rating (R² = 0.952; p = 0.005). The shoe with a medium midsole bending stiffness had the lowest value for PAV (845.6 deg/s) and the best rating of perceived ‘ride’ on average. Our results show that IMU can be used as a low-cost method to investigate the heel–toe transition during field-running. In addition, we found that midsole bending stiffness influenced PAV and the subjective feeling of ‘ride’.

Background/Objectives: Running is one of the most popular physical activities worldwide and have been widely studied in relation to performance and injury prevention. In addition to measurements conducted under standardized laboratory conditions, inertial measurement units (IMUs) allow for the assessment of biomechanical parameters in real-world settings—particularly during endurance runs. The aim of this study was to investigate how running a half-marathon under field conditions affects exertion and various biomechanical parameters, as measured using IMUs. Methods: Twenty runners completed a half-marathon on a flat, even-surfaced walkway at a self-selected, constant pace corresponding to a brisk training run. In addition to lower limb biomechanics, heart rate (HR) and ratings of perceived exertion (REP) were also recorded. Results: A significant increase in both HR and RPE was observed toward the end of the half-marathon, indicating the presence of fatigue during the later stages of the run. The biomechanical results further demonstrate that this fatigue was associated with increased peak tibial acceleration, peak angular velocity in the sagittal plane of the foot, and peak rearfoot eversion velocity, while foot strike angle, stride frequency, and stride length remained unchanged. Furthermore, a progressive increase in ground contact time and a decrease in flight time were observed over the course of the run, resulting in an increased duty factor. Conclusions: These findings highlight the value of IMU-based assessments for detecting fatigue-related biomechanical changes during prolonged runs in real-world conditions, which may contribute to early identification of overload and inform injury prevention strategies.

Running velocity is an important methodological factor in footwear research, given its potential influence on biomechanical parameters used to evaluate shoe-specific effects. Since most previous studies have assessed footwear effects at standardized running velocities, it remains unclear whether shoe-specific biomechanical response patterns differ when runners transition to individually selected faster outdoor running velocities. Therefore, this study examined whether footwear-related biomechanical responses were modified by running velocity. Twenty-two runners completed outdoor running trials at two running velocities in seven running shoes differing in cushioning and midsole bending stiffness. Four commonly used inertial measurement unit-derived biomechanical parameters were assessed to determine whether shoe-specific responses differed between the two velocity conditions. Across all parameters, no significant shoe condition × running velocity interaction effects were observed. Higher running velocities increased the magnitude of the measured parameters, while the tested interaction terms did not provide statistical evidence that the relative shoe-related response patterns were systematically altered within the investigated velocity range. These findings suggest that individually preferred running velocities may be suitable for comparing relative shoe effects in field-based footwear testing for the investigated parameters and velocity range.