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.
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.
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.
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.