Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 19, 2026
Influence of Step-Width Manipulation on Running Biomechanics
Published on: February 28, 2025
Exploring Factors to Explain Interindividual Responses to Running Economy in Advanced Footwear Technology Shoes: A
Kim Hebert-Losier1,2, Christiaan Cumming3,4, Benjamin Bidois3
1School of Sport & Human Movement, Division of Health, University of Waikato, Tauranga, New Zealand. kim.hebert-losier@waikato.ac.nz.
Background:
Advanced footwear technology (AFT) generally improves running economy (RE) measures on average by 4%, although considerable interindividual variability exists. We aimed to explore this interindividual variability in RE response to AFT compared to a CONTROL shoe and identify potential predictors of this variability. Specifically, differences in participant characteristics (e.g., age, sex, anthropometrics, running experience and speed, prior AFT use, V̇O2 peak, lower-limb neuromuscular performance, passive stiffness, running biomechanics, and perceptual measures) between above-threshold and below-threshold responders (∆RE threshold: 2.5%) and how these measures related to RE responses were explored.
Methods:
Sixty-four participants (50% female) attended two laboratory sessions at the University of Waikato Sports Science Laboratory in Cambridge, New Zealand, between 10 October 2024 and 7 February 2025. The first session collected baseline information and participant characteristics related to anthropometric, stiffness, strength, and V̇O2 peak. The second session assessed RE variables at 70% of a maximal aerobic test (i.e., V̇O2 peak) speed in two randomised shoe conditions: Salomon S/Lab Phantasm 2 (AFT) and Salomon Aero Glide 2 (CONTROL).
Results:
AFT significantly improved RE (4.13 ± 1.6%, range: - 2.62% [detrimental] to 11.01% [beneficial]) based on change in oxygen consumption. Significant differences between above-threshold (n = 53) and below-threshold (n = 11) responders were limited to the former exhibiting greater gastrocnemius medialis (GM) stiffness normalised to leg length (mean difference = 33.4 N·m-2, Hedges' g = 0.86 [0.20, 1.51], p = 0.046). GM stiffness normalised to leg length (B = 0.014 N·m-2, p = 0.015) and navicular drop (B = 1.849 cm, p = 0.028) significantly predicted RE responses in our regression model (R2 = 0.273), with greater stiffness (r = 0.35 [0.11, 0.55], p = 0.005) and navicular drop (r = 0.31 [0.07, 0.52], p = 0.012) associated with more beneficial AFT responses.
Conclusion:
AFT enhanced RE in most runners, with few factors explaining the interindividual variance observed.
Trial Registration:
Australian New Zealand Trials Registry, ACTRN12624000753550, 18th June 2024, prospectively.
More Related Videos
06:35Using Gold-standard Gait Analysis Methods to Assess Experience Effects on Lower-limb Mechanics During Moderate High-heeled Jogging and Running
Published on: September 14, 2017
08:26Comparative Analysis of Lower Limb Kinematics between the Initial and Terminal Phase of 5km Treadmill Running
Published on: July 17, 2020
Related Concept Videos
01:12What is an Experiment?
01:25Multiple Regression
Farmers can use multiple regression to determine the crop yield based on more than one factor, such as water availability, fertilizer, soil properties, etc. Here, the crop yield is the response or dependent variable as it depends on the other independent variables. The analysis requires the construction of a scatter plot...
01:16Crossover Experiments
Crossover designs are performed even with smaller sample sizes since the samples can act as their controls. These are better than simple randomized trials since patients are exposed to all the treatments.