Background: Running-related injuries (RRIs) are a prevalent issue for runners, with several factors proposed to be causative. The majority of studies to date are limited by retrospective study design, small sample sizes and seem to focus on individual risk factors in isolation. This study aims to investigate the multifactorial contribution of risk factors to prospective RRIs. Methods: Recreational runners (n = 258) participated in the study, where injury history and training practices, impact acceleration, and running kinematics were assessed at a baseline testing session. Prospective injuries were tracked for one year. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression was performed in the analysis. Results: A total of 51% of runners sustained a prospective injury, with the calf most commonly affected. Univariate analysis found previous history of injury < 1 year ago, training for a marathon, frequent changing of shoes (every 0–3 months), and running technique (non-rearfoot strike pattern, less knee valgus, greater knee rotation) to be significantly associated with injury. The multivariate analysis revealed previous injury, training for a marathon, less knee valgus, and greater thorax drop to the contralateral side to be risk factors for injury. Conclusion: This study found several factors to be potentially causative of injury. With the omission of previous injury history, the risk factors (footwear, marathon training and running kinematics) identified in this study may be easily modifiable, and therefore could inform injury prevention strategies. This is the first study to find foot strike pattern and trunk kinematics to relate to prospective injury.

Background: Given the high incidence and heavy burden of running related injuries, large-scale, prospective multifactorial investigations examining potential risk factors are warranted. This study aimed to identify factors associated with running related injuries and to evaluate their potential in injury screening. Study design: Prospective cohort study. Materials and methods: Two hundred and seventy-four recreational runners were recruited. Clinical measures (strength, range of motion, foot position), injury and training history (via questionnaire), impact loading (via accelerometery) and running technique measures were collected at baseline. Runners were tracked for injury for one year via fortnightly check-ins. A binary logistic regression, (injury versus no injury), was performed for each variable univariably, and then adjusting for age, sex and mileage. A multivariable regression was also performed to evaluate the model’s discriminative ability. Results: Of the 225 runners included in the final analysis 52% experienced a running related injury. Injury history in the past year, less navicular drop, and measures of running technique (knee, hip, and pelvis kinematics) were associated with increased odds of injury (p < .05). The multivariable logistic regression model was statistically significant, χ²(11) = 56.45, p < .001, correctly classifying 74% of cases with a sensitivity and specificity of 72% and 76%, respectively. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.79 (CI_95% = 0.73–0.85), demonstrating acceptable discriminative ability. Conclusions: This study found a number of clinical and running technique factors to be associated with prospective running related injuries among recreational runners. With the exception of injury history, the factors identified as being significantly associated with injury may be modifiable and therefore, could form the basis of interventions. Range of motion, spatiotemporal parameters and strength measures were not associated with injury and thus their utilisation in injury prevention practices should be reconsidered.

Whilst running is hugely popular, running-related injuries (RRIs) are prevalent. High impact loading has been proposed to contribute to RRIs, with accelerometers becoming increasingly popular in estimating segmental loading for injury detection and biofeedback training. However, there is a lack of research examining the reliability of measures of impact acceleration across short- and long-term time periods, both prior to and following exerted running. The aim of this study was to assess the absolute and relative reliability of shank and sacral impact accelerations over a short- and long-term time period. Peak (Peak_accel) and rate (Rate_accel) of impact acceleration at the shank and sacrum were assessed in 18 recreational runners over short- and long-term time frames, across fixed and self-selected speeds. The relative and absolute reliabilities were investigated for pre- and post-exerted states of running. There was high-to-excellent relative reliability, and predominantly moderate absolute reliability for shank and sacrum Peak_accel and Rate_accel in the short- and long-term time frames between pre- and post-exerted states. High to excellent relative reliability of Peak_accel and Rate_accel at the shank and sacrum are appropriate and acceptable measures across short- and long-term time frames. These findings were consistent with different levels of speed and exertion. The minimal detectable change % was large for both sensors and associated measurements, indicating that their use may be limited to intervention studies that elicit large change (>30%) in these measures.

Inconsistent and restricted definitions of injury have contributed to limitations in determining injury rates and identifying risk factors for running‐related injuries (RRIs). The aim of this scoping review was to investigate the definitions and surveillance methods of RRIs. A systematic electronic search was performed using PubMed, Scopus, SPORTDiscuss, MEDLINE, and Web of Science databases. Included studies were published in English between January 1980 and June 2023 which investigated RRIs in adult running populations, providing a definition for a general RRI. Results were extracted and collated. 204 articles were included. Three primary criteria were used to define RRIs: physical description, effect on training and medical intervention, while three secondary criteria are also associated with definitions: cause/onset of injury, location, and social consequences. Further descriptors and sub‐descriptors form these criteria. The use of Boolean operators resulted in nine variations in definitions. Inconsistency is evident among definitions of RRIs. Injury definitions seem to be important for two main reasons: firstly, determining accurate injury rates, and secondly, in research examining risk factors. For the latter, definitions seem to be very limited, only capturing severe injuries and failing to recognise the full development process of RRIs, precluding the identification of conclusive risk factors. A potential two‐approach solution is the initial use of a broad definition acting as a gatekeeper for identifying any potential injury, and follow‐up with an extensive surveillance tool to capture the specific consequences of the varying severity of RRIs.

Although many runners train overground, measuring impact accelerations on a treadmill may be advantageous for researchers and clinicians. Previous investigations of peak and rate of acceleration (peak_accel, rate_accel) during treadmill running compared to overground running have not examined both the relative consistency and absolute agreement of these measures, or the effect of treadmill stiffness. (1) Are peak_accel and rate_accel produced during running on a stiff and less stiff treadmill 'representative' of those produced during overground running? (2) Are peak_accel and rate_accel measured on treadmills of different stiffness 'representative' of each other? Eighteen participants ran at a self-selected pace on three surfaces: Treadmill 1 (reduced stiffness), Treadmill 2 (increased stiffness) and overground on asphalt, whilst peak_accel and rate_accel were recorded at the shank and lower back. Relative consistency (ICC (3,1)), absolute agreement (Bland-Altman analysis) and systematic differences (ANOVA/Friedman's Tests) were assessed. ICCs revealed moderate to excellent relative consistency in peak_accel and rate_accel between surfaces, with higher consistency for measures at the lower back. Absolute agreement was low, with the Bland Altman limits of agreement exceeding the clinical acceptable range for all comparisons. For systematic differences in means, peak_accel and rate_accel at the shank were significantly higher overground than on either treadmill; with no difference evident at the lower back. No differences were found for surface with respect to shank or lower back peak_accel and rate_accel between treadmills. Moderate to excellent relative consistency of peak_accel and rate_accel between the surfaces suggests that using different surfaces in research involving rank ordering of participants by acceleration magnitude may be acceptable (e.g. prospective studies examining if impact accelerations are related to injury). However, low absolute agreement indicates that data collected on treadmills of different stiffness and overground should not be used interchangeably (e.g. running-retraining studies).

Introduction: Loneliness and physical inactivity are issues that affect both young people and older adults. This can have negative health outcomes and well as high costs on health services. Physical activity can positively influence both physical and psychosocial health outcomes, however enjoyment is necessary for adherence. Combining exercise with arts-based activities can improve enjoyment for older adults and young people. Dance has been found to be a safe and enjoyable form of physical activity that can be equally or more effective than conventional exercise options. Intergenerational interventions can improve relationships between generations. The aim of this scoping review was to collate and map the available evidence for intergenerational dance. Methods: This scoping review followed the guidance outlined by the Joanna Briggs Institute. A systematic search of nine multidisciplinary databases and four repositories was conducted. Inclusion criteria were intergenerational dance or movement to music programmes. Exclusion criteria included dance movement therapy or groups with less than one generational gap. Data were extracted and summarised using narrative synthesis and research papers were appraised using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Results: The search identified eleven research studies, seven expert opinion/practice expertise and 13 sources from the grey literature. Dance classes were typically 11–12 weeks long. Genres varied with some programmes including co-creation through choreography. Experiences and social outcomes were the most assessed outcomes, with a lack of studies examining physical outcomes. Participants reported enjoying the programmes stating they felt proud for taking part and looked forward to sessions. The term intergenerational was not defined in any paper. Conclusions: Intergenerational dance is an emerging area of research. Many programmes run in communities but are not researched, therefore several gaps remain. More large-scale trials are needed around intergenerational dance. Definitions and descriptions of dance and intergenerational activity should be considered in future studies to ensure consistency.