Cargando…

Is Motorized Treadmill Running Biomechanically Comparable to Overground Running? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cross-Over Studies

BACKGROUND: Treadmills are often used in research, clinical practice, and training. Biomechanical investigations comparing treadmill and overground running report inconsistent findings. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed at comparing biomechanical outcomes between motorized treadmill and overground running...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Van Hooren, Bas, Fuller, Joel T., Buckley, Jonathan D., Miller, Jayme R., Sewell, Kerry, Rao, Guillaume, Barton, Christian, Bishop, Chris, Willy, Richard W.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7069922/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31802395
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40279-019-01237-z
_version_ 1783505867129225216
author Van Hooren, Bas
Fuller, Joel T.
Buckley, Jonathan D.
Miller, Jayme R.
Sewell, Kerry
Rao, Guillaume
Barton, Christian
Bishop, Chris
Willy, Richard W.
author_facet Van Hooren, Bas
Fuller, Joel T.
Buckley, Jonathan D.
Miller, Jayme R.
Sewell, Kerry
Rao, Guillaume
Barton, Christian
Bishop, Chris
Willy, Richard W.
author_sort Van Hooren, Bas
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Treadmills are often used in research, clinical practice, and training. Biomechanical investigations comparing treadmill and overground running report inconsistent findings. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed at comparing biomechanical outcomes between motorized treadmill and overground running. METHODS: Four databases were searched until June 2019. Crossover design studies comparing lower limb biomechanics during non-inclined, non-cushioned, quasi-constant-velocity motorized treadmill running with overground running in healthy humans (18–65 years) and written in English were included. Meta-analyses and meta-regressions were performed where possible. RESULTS: 33 studies (n = 494 participants) were included. Most outcomes did not differ between running conditions. However, during treadmill running, sagittal foot–ground angle at footstrike (mean difference (MD) − 9.8° [95% confidence interval: − 13.1 to − 6.6]; low GRADE evidence), knee flexion range of motion from footstrike to peak during stance (MD 6.3° [4.5 to 8.2]; low), vertical displacement center of mass/pelvis (MD − 1.5 cm [− 2.7 to − 0.8]; low), and peak propulsive force (MD − 0.04 body weights [− 0.06 to − 0.02]; very low) were lower, while contact time (MD 5.0 ms [0.5 to 9.5]; low), knee flexion at footstrike (MD − 2.3° [− 3.6 to − 1.1]; low), and ankle sagittal plane internal joint moment (MD − 0.4 Nm/kg [− 0.7 to − 0.2]; low) were longer/higher, when pooled across overground surfaces. Conflicting findings were reported for amplitude of muscle activity. CONCLUSIONS: Spatiotemporal, kinematic, kinetic, muscle activity, and muscle–tendon outcome measures are largely comparable between motorized treadmill and overground running. Considerations should, however, particularly be given to sagittal plane kinematic differences at footstrike when extrapolating treadmill running biomechanics to overground running. Protocol registration CRD42018083906 (PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews). ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s40279-019-01237-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7069922
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70699222020-03-23 Is Motorized Treadmill Running Biomechanically Comparable to Overground Running? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cross-Over Studies Van Hooren, Bas Fuller, Joel T. Buckley, Jonathan D. Miller, Jayme R. Sewell, Kerry Rao, Guillaume Barton, Christian Bishop, Chris Willy, Richard W. Sports Med Systematic Review BACKGROUND: Treadmills are often used in research, clinical practice, and training. Biomechanical investigations comparing treadmill and overground running report inconsistent findings. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed at comparing biomechanical outcomes between motorized treadmill and overground running. METHODS: Four databases were searched until June 2019. Crossover design studies comparing lower limb biomechanics during non-inclined, non-cushioned, quasi-constant-velocity motorized treadmill running with overground running in healthy humans (18–65 years) and written in English were included. Meta-analyses and meta-regressions were performed where possible. RESULTS: 33 studies (n = 494 participants) were included. Most outcomes did not differ between running conditions. However, during treadmill running, sagittal foot–ground angle at footstrike (mean difference (MD) − 9.8° [95% confidence interval: − 13.1 to − 6.6]; low GRADE evidence), knee flexion range of motion from footstrike to peak during stance (MD 6.3° [4.5 to 8.2]; low), vertical displacement center of mass/pelvis (MD − 1.5 cm [− 2.7 to − 0.8]; low), and peak propulsive force (MD − 0.04 body weights [− 0.06 to − 0.02]; very low) were lower, while contact time (MD 5.0 ms [0.5 to 9.5]; low), knee flexion at footstrike (MD − 2.3° [− 3.6 to − 1.1]; low), and ankle sagittal plane internal joint moment (MD − 0.4 Nm/kg [− 0.7 to − 0.2]; low) were longer/higher, when pooled across overground surfaces. Conflicting findings were reported for amplitude of muscle activity. CONCLUSIONS: Spatiotemporal, kinematic, kinetic, muscle activity, and muscle–tendon outcome measures are largely comparable between motorized treadmill and overground running. Considerations should, however, particularly be given to sagittal plane kinematic differences at footstrike when extrapolating treadmill running biomechanics to overground running. Protocol registration CRD42018083906 (PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews). ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s40279-019-01237-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer International Publishing 2019-12-04 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC7069922/ /pubmed/31802395 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40279-019-01237-z Text en © The Author(s) 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Systematic Review
Van Hooren, Bas
Fuller, Joel T.
Buckley, Jonathan D.
Miller, Jayme R.
Sewell, Kerry
Rao, Guillaume
Barton, Christian
Bishop, Chris
Willy, Richard W.
Is Motorized Treadmill Running Biomechanically Comparable to Overground Running? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cross-Over Studies
title Is Motorized Treadmill Running Biomechanically Comparable to Overground Running? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cross-Over Studies
title_full Is Motorized Treadmill Running Biomechanically Comparable to Overground Running? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cross-Over Studies
title_fullStr Is Motorized Treadmill Running Biomechanically Comparable to Overground Running? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cross-Over Studies
title_full_unstemmed Is Motorized Treadmill Running Biomechanically Comparable to Overground Running? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cross-Over Studies
title_short Is Motorized Treadmill Running Biomechanically Comparable to Overground Running? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cross-Over Studies
title_sort is motorized treadmill running biomechanically comparable to overground running? a systematic review and meta-analysis of cross-over studies
topic Systematic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7069922/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31802395
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40279-019-01237-z
work_keys_str_mv AT vanhoorenbas ismotorizedtreadmillrunningbiomechanicallycomparabletoovergroundrunningasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcrossoverstudies
AT fullerjoelt ismotorizedtreadmillrunningbiomechanicallycomparabletoovergroundrunningasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcrossoverstudies
AT buckleyjonathand ismotorizedtreadmillrunningbiomechanicallycomparabletoovergroundrunningasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcrossoverstudies
AT millerjaymer ismotorizedtreadmillrunningbiomechanicallycomparabletoovergroundrunningasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcrossoverstudies
AT sewellkerry ismotorizedtreadmillrunningbiomechanicallycomparabletoovergroundrunningasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcrossoverstudies
AT raoguillaume ismotorizedtreadmillrunningbiomechanicallycomparabletoovergroundrunningasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcrossoverstudies
AT bartonchristian ismotorizedtreadmillrunningbiomechanicallycomparabletoovergroundrunningasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcrossoverstudies
AT bishopchris ismotorizedtreadmillrunningbiomechanicallycomparabletoovergroundrunningasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcrossoverstudies
AT willyrichardw ismotorizedtreadmillrunningbiomechanicallycomparabletoovergroundrunningasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcrossoverstudies