Article

Metabolic cost of running barefoot versus shod: is lighter better?

Locomotion Lab, Department of Integrative Physiology, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, USA.
Medicine and science in sports and exercise (Impact Factor: 4.48). 02/2012; 44(8):1519-25. DOI: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e3182514a88
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Based on mass alone, one might intuit that running barefoot would exact a lower metabolic cost than running in shoes. Numerous studies have shown that adding mass to shoes increases submaximal oxygen uptake (V˙O(2)) by approximately 1% per 100 g per shoe. However, only two of the seven studies on the topic have found a statistically significant difference in V˙O(2) between barefoot and shod running. The lack of difference found in these studies suggests that factors other than shoe mass (e.g., barefoot running experience, foot strike pattern, shoe construction) may play important roles in determining the metabolic cost of barefoot versus shod running. Our goal was to quantify the metabolic effects of adding mass to the feet and compare oxygen uptake and metabolic power during barefoot versus shod running while controlling for barefoot running experience, foot strike pattern, and footwear.
Twelve males with substantial barefoot running experience ran at 3.35 m·s with a midfoot strike pattern on a motorized treadmill, both barefoot and in lightweight cushioned shoes (∼150 g per shoe). In additional trials, we attached small lead strips to each foot/shoe (∼150, ∼300, and ∼450 g). For each condition, we measured the subjects' rates of oxygen consumption and carbon dioxide production and calculated metabolic power.
V˙O(2) increased by approximately 1% for each 100 g added per foot, whether barefoot or shod (P < 0.001). However, barefoot and shod running did not significantly differ in V˙O(2) or metabolic power. A consequence of these two findings was that for footwear conditions of equal mass, shod running had ∼3%-4% lower V˙O(2) and metabolic power demand than barefoot running (P < 0.05).
Running barefoot offers no metabolic advantage over running in lightweight, cushioned shoes.

3 Bookmarks
 · 
600 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of a 4-week familiarization to simulated barefoot running (SBR) on running economy (RE) when compared with shod running. Fifteen trained male runners (age: 24 ± 4 years; stature: 177.2 ± 6.21 cm; mass: 67.99 ± 7.36 kg and VO(2max) 70.2 ± 5.2 mL/kg/min) were recruited. Subjects completed two RE tests, 24 h apart, in a random order, in both the SBR and shod condition (pretest) at 11 km/h and 13 km/h. Oxygen uptake, heart rate, stride frequency, and foot strike patterns were measured in both conditions. Subjects then completed a 4-week familiarization period of SBR, before repeating the two RE tests (post-test). At pretest, there was no significant difference in RE between SBR and shod running (P = 0.463), but following the 4-week familiarization period, RE significantly improved by 6.9% in the SBR condition compared with shod running (46.4 ± 0.9 vs 43.2 ± 1.2 mL/kg/min; P = 0.011). A significant improvement in RE was observed in the SBR condition (8.09%) between the pretest and post-test (47.0 ± 1.2 vs 43.2 ± 1.2 mL/kg/min; P = 0.002). RE improved in the SBR condition as a result of familiarization, and became significantly lower in SBR compared with shod running.
    Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports 12/2012; · 3.21 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Running shoes are often marketed based on mass. A total of 50 young adult males participated across two separate experiments to determine how well they could perceive the relative masses of five different running shoes using hands versus feet. For the foot portion, subjects were blindly fitted with the shoes and asked to rank their masses individually using visual analogue scales (VAS) and verbal rankings. For the hand portion, two different methods were used, one presenting all shoes simultaneously and the other presenting the shoes individually. Verbal accuracy and VAS scores correlated across subjects for the hand and foot, but accuracy in mass perception by the feet was 30% compared to 92% or 63% by the hand (depending on the method). These results indicate the foot perceives mass poorly compared to the hand, and that consumers' perception of shoe mass may come more from handling shoes versus wearing them.
    Ergonomics 06/2014; 57(6):912-920. · 1.67 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives Minimalist running shoes have been proposed as an alternative to barefoot running. However, several studies have reported cases of forefoot stress fractures after switching from standard to minimalist shoes. Therefore, the aim of the current study was to investigate the differences in plantar pressure in the forefoot region between running with a minimalist shoe and running with a standard shoe in healthy female runners during overground running. Design Randomized crossover design Methods In-shoe plantar pressure measurements were recorded from eighteen healthy female runners. Peak pressure, maximum mean pressure, pressure time integral and instant of peak pressure were assessed for seven foot areas. Force time integral, stride time, stance time, swing time, shoe comfort and landing type were assessed for both shoe types. A linear mixed model was used to analyze the data. Results Peak pressure and maximum mean pressure were higher in the medial forefoot (respectively 13.5% and 7.46%), central forefoot (respectively 37.5% and 29.2%) and lateral forefoot (respectively 37.9% and 20.4%) for the minimalist shoe condition. Stance time was reduced with 3.81%. No relevant differences in shoe comfort or landing strategy were found. Conclusion Running with a minimalist shoe increased plantar pressure without a change in landing pattern. This increased pressure in the forefoot region might play a role in the occurrence of metatarsal stress fractures in runners who switched to minimalist shoes and warrants a cautious approach to transitioning to minimalist shoe use.
    Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport 01/2014; · 2.90 Impact Factor

Full-text

View
1,271 Downloads
Available from
Jun 2, 2014