Displaying all 7 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Gindre C, Lussiana T, Hebert-Losier K, Mourot L
    Int J Sports Med, 2016 Jan;37(1):25-9.
    PMID: 26509380 DOI: 10.1055/s-0035-1555931
    Biomechanical parameters are often analyzed independently, although running gait is a dynamic system wherein changes in one parameter are likely to affect another. Accordingly, the Volodalen® method provides a model for classifying running patterns into 2 categories, aerial and terrestrial, using a global subjective rating scoring system. We aimed to validate the Volodalen® method by verifying whether the aerial and terrestrial patterns, defined subjectively by a running coach, were associated with distinct objectively-measured biomechanical parameters. The running patterns of 91 individuals were assessed subjectively using the Volodalen® method by an expert running coach during a 10-min running warm-up. Biomechanical parameters were measured objectively using the OptojumpNext® during a 50-m run performed at 3.3, 4.2, and 5 m·s(-1) and were compared between aerial- and terrestrial-classified subjects. Longer contact times and greater leg compression were observed in the terrestrial compared to the aerial runners. The aerial runners exhibited longer flight time, greater center of mass displacement, maximum vertical force and leg stiffness than the terrestrial ones. The subjective categorization of running patterns was associated with distinct objectively-quantified biomechanical parameters. Our results suggest that a subjective holistic assessment of running patterns provides insight into the biomechanics of running gaits of individuals.
  2. Gindre C, Lussiana T, Hebert-Losier K, Morin JB
    J Sports Sci, 2016;34(7):664-70.
    PMID: 26177053 DOI: 10.1080/02640414.2015.1068436
    Accelerometer-based systems are often used to quantify human movement. This study's aim was to assess the reliability and validity of the Myotest® accelerometer-based system for measuring running stride kinematics. Twenty habitual runners ran two 60 m trials at 12, 15, 18 and 21 km·h(-1). Contact time, aerial time and step frequency parameters from six consecutive running steps of each trial were extracted using Myotest® data. Between-trial reproducibility of measures was determined by comparing kinematic parameters from the two runs performed at the same speed. Myotest® measures were compared against photocell-based (Optojump Next®) and high-frequency video data to establish concurrent validity. The Myotest®-derived parameters were highly reproducible between trials at all running speeds (intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC): 0.886 to 0.974). Compared to the photo-cell and high-speed video-based measures, the mean contact times from the Myotest® were 34% shorter and aerial times were 64% longer. Only step frequency was comparable between systems and demonstrated high between-system correlation (ICC ≥ 0.857). The Myotest® is a practical portable device that is reliable for measuring contact time, aerial time and step frequency during running. In terms of validity, it provides accurate step frequency measures but underestimates contact time and overestimates aerial time compared to photocell- and optical-based systems.
  3. Lussiana T, Gindre C, Mourot L, Hébert-Losier K
    Eur J Sport Sci, 2017 Aug;17(7):847-857.
    PMID: 28488928 DOI: 10.1080/17461391.2017.1325072
    Running patterns are often categorized into subgroups according to common features before data analysis and interpretation. The Volodalen® method is a simple field-based tool used to classify runners into aerial or terrestrial using a 5-item subjective rating scale. We aimed to validate the Volodalen® method by quantifying the relationship between its subjective scores and 3D biomechanical measures. Fifty-four runners ran 30 s on a treadmill at 10, 12, 14, 16, and 18 km h-1 while their kinematics were assessed subjectively using the Volodalen® method and objectively using 3D motion capture. For each runner and speed, two researchers scored the five Volodalen® items on a 1-to-5 scale, which addressed vertical oscillation, upper-body motion, pelvis and foot position at ground contact, and footstrike pattern. Seven 3D biomechanical parameters reflecting the subjective items were also collected and correlated to the subjective scores. Twenty-eight runners were classified as aerial and 26 as terrestrial. Runner classification did not change with speed, but the relative contribution of the biomechanical parameters to the subjective classification was speed dependent. The magnitude of correlations between subjective and objective measures ranged from trivial to very large. Five of the seven objective parameters significantly differed between aerial and terrestrial runners, and these parameters demonstrated the strongest correlations to the subjective scores. Our results support the validity of the Volodalen® method, whereby the visual appreciation of running gait reflected quantifiable objective parameters. Two minor modifications to the method are proposed to simplify its use and improve agreement between subjective and objective measures.
  4. Lussiana T, Patoz A, Gindre C, Mourot L, Hébert-Losier K
    J Exp Biol, 2019 03 18;222(Pt 6).
    PMID: 30787136 DOI: 10.1242/jeb.192047
    A lower duty factor (DF) reflects a greater relative contribution of leg swing versus ground contact time during the running step. Increasing time on the ground has been reported in the scientific literature to both increase and decrease the energy cost (EC) of running, with DF reported to be highly variable in runners. As increasing running speed aligns running kinematics more closely with spring-mass model behaviours and re-use of elastic energy, we compared the centre of mass (COM) displacement and EC between runners with a low (DFlow) and high (DFhigh) duty factor at typical endurance running speeds. Forty well-trained runners were divided in two groups based on their mean DF measured across a range of speeds. EC was measured from 4 min treadmill runs at 10, 12 and 14 km h-1 using indirect calorimetry. Temporal characteristics and COM displacement data of the running step were recorded from 30 s treadmill runs at 10, 12, 14, 16 and 18 km h-1 Across speeds, DFlow exhibited more symmetrical patterns between braking and propulsion phases in terms of time and vertical COM displacement than DFhigh DFhigh limited global vertical COM displacements in favour of horizontal progression during ground contact. Despite these running kinematics differences, no significant difference in EC was observed between groups. Therefore, both DF strategies seem energetically efficient at endurance running speeds.
  5. Patoz A, Lussiana T, Gindre C, Hébert-Losier K
    Sports (Basel), 2019 Jun 17;7(6).
    PMID: 31212983 DOI: 10.3390/sports7060147
    Close to 90% of recreational runners rearfoot strike in a long-distance road race. This prevalence has been obtained from North American cohorts of runners. The prevalence of rearfoot strikers has not been extensively examined in an Asian population of recreational runners. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of rearfoot, midfoot, and forefoot strikers during a long-distance road race in Asian recreational runners and compare this prevalence to reported values in the scientific literature. To do so, we classified the foot strike pattern of 950 recreational runners at the 10 km mark of the Singapore marathon (77% Asian field). We observed 71.1%, 16.6%, 1.7%, and 10.6% of rearfoot, midfoot, forefoot, and asymmetric strikers, respectively. Chi-squared tests revealed significant differences between our foot strike pattern distribution and those reported from North American cohorts (P < 0.001). Our foot strike pattern distribution was similar to one reported from elite half-marathon runners racing in Japan (Fisher exact test, P = 0.168). We conclude that the prevalence of rearfoot strikers is lower in Asian than North American recreational runners. Running research should consider and report ethnicity of participants given that ethnicity can potentially explain biomechanical differences in running patterns.
  6. Lussiana T, Gindre C, Hébert-Losier K, Sagawa Y, Gimenez P, Mourot L
    PMID: 27617625
    There is no unique or 'ideal' running pattern that is the most economical for all runners. Classifying the global running patterns of individuals into two categories (aerial and terrestrial) using the Volodalen® method could permit a better understanding of the relationship between running economy (RE) and biomechanics. The main purpose was to compare RE between aerial and terrestrial runners.
  7. Patoz A, Lussiana T, Breine B, Gindre C, Malatesta D, Hébert-Losier K
    Sports Biomech, 2022 Jul 04.
    PMID: 35787231 DOI: 10.1080/14763141.2022.2094825
    Duty factor (DF) and step frequency (SF) are key running pattern determinants. However, running patterns may change with speed if DF and SF changes are inconsistent across speeds. We examined whether the relative positioning of runners was consistent: 1) across five running speeds (10-18 km/h) for four temporal variables [DF, SF, and their subcomponents: contact (tc) and flight (tf) time]; and 2) across these four temporal variables at these five speeds. Three-dimensional whole-body kinematics were acquired from 52 runners, and deviations from the median for each variable (normalised to minimum-maximum values) were extracted. Across speeds for all variables, correlations on the relative positioning of individuals were high to very high for 2-4 km/h speed differences, and moderate to high for 6-8 km/h differences. Across variables for all speeds, correlations were low between DF-SF, very high between DF-tf, and low to high between DF-tc, SF-tc, and SF-tf. Hence, the consistency in running patterns decreased as speed differences increased, suggesting that running patterns be assessed using a range of speeds. Consistency in running patterns at a given speed was low between DF and SF, corroborating suggestions that using both variables can encapsulate the full running pattern spectrum.
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links