The effect of different footwear on joints stiffness in individuals with patellofemoral pain syndrome during stance phase of running

Oral Presentation
Paper ID : 2029-SSRC
Authors
1دانشگاه مازندران،دانشکده تربیت بدنی
2دانشجوی دانشگاه مازندران
3Sports Biomechanics
4گروه بیومکانیک و رفتار حرکتی، دانشکده علوم ورزشی، دانشگاه مازندران
Abstract
Background: Patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS) can be affected by running mechanics and footwear conditions. The role of changing the stiffness of ankle and knee joints due to different footwear types is still not properly understood in PFPS. The aim of the present study is to investigate the influence of conventional footwear (CF), motion control footwear (MF) and barefoot running (BF) on dynamic joint stiffness (DJS) in individuals with PFPS during stance phase of running. Methods: Twelve females with PFPS were recruited for this study. Each participant completed three running trials with different footwear types (CF, MF and BF). Three-dimensional kinematic and ground reaction forces data were captured using a six-camera motion capture system and a force platform, respectively. Joint stiffness during the stance phase of running was calculated for ankle and knee in frontal and sagittal plane. Results:During the initial 10% of the stance phase DJS in ankle joint decreased in CF compared to BF and MF in frontal plane (pMF&CF=0.007; pBF&CF=0.023), while knee DJS in sagittal plane increased in CF compared to BF (p=0.002). In the continuation of the stance phase (11 to 25%), the stiffness of the ankle joint at the frontal plane was reduced in CF compared to MF (p=0.052), and the stiffness of the knee joint at the sagittal plane was lower in CF compared to BF and MF (pMF&CF=0.016; pBF&CF=0.022). Conclusion: In the frontal plane, MF effectively fulfilled their role in controlling pronation, leading to increased ankle joint stiffness during both phases when compared to CF. The reduction of knee joint stiffness in the first 10% of the stance phase during BF running compared to CF shows that the subjects felt more secure and comfortable in CF. But after absorbing the initial shock, in the continuation of the stance phase, the stiffness of the knee joint in BF and MF was significantly higher than in CF, which indicates the increase in stability and mechanical efficiency in BF and MF running. These results show that using MF may have some benefits for PFPS patients.
Keywords