Exploring the Relations Between Running Variability and Injury Susceptibility: A Scoping Review.

IF 2.2 Q2 SPORT SCIENCES
Sports Pub Date : 2025-02-13 DOI:10.3390/sports13020055
Zaheen Ahmed Iqbal, Daniel Hung-Kay Chow
{"title":"Exploring the Relations Between Running Variability and Injury Susceptibility: A Scoping Review.","authors":"Zaheen Ahmed Iqbal, Daniel Hung-Kay Chow","doi":"10.3390/sports13020055","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Variability in running mechanics, termed running variability, reflects the adaptability of the locomotor system to dynamic environments. Due to inconsistent findings in the literature, there is a research gap in understanding its role in injury.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This scoping review explores running variability's influence on injury susceptibility, examining studies across various injury types, skill levels, methods, and analysis adhering to the guidelines outlined in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews checklist (PRISMA-ScR). Eligibility criteria and sources of evidence: Twenty-one studies illustrating the complexity of running variability in relation to running-related injuries were selected from Web of Science, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, and PubMed databases during December 2022 to June 2024.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There are significant differences in running variability between injured and healthy runners, with variability influenced by injury type, stage, and individual differences with varying levels of evidence. Out of 21 studies, 8 (38%) found no group differences, 11 (52%) noted higher running variability in injured participants, and 5 (24%) reported lower variability in injured than healthy subjects. The review was constrained by the diverse subjects, methods, tasks, and outcome variables across the studies.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Currently, there is no standard normal range for running variability and abnormal variability is defined relative to control groups, though healthy controls can also show abnormal variability without injury in some study designs. Despite the absence of standardized running variability norms, wearable sensors offer insights into real-world running mechanics, presenting running variability as a potential predictor of running-related injuries. The review highlights the need for standardized protocols and further research to clarify running variability's role in injury prediction and prevention, emphasizing the necessity of individualized approaches in training and rehabilitation. Future studies should aim to establish a causal relationship between running variability and injury susceptibility, focusing on identifying variability patterns that precede or follow an injury. This review sets the stage for developing evidence-based strategies to optimize running performance and minimize injury risks.</p>","PeriodicalId":53303,"journal":{"name":"Sports","volume":"13 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11861345/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/sports13020055","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Variability in running mechanics, termed running variability, reflects the adaptability of the locomotor system to dynamic environments. Due to inconsistent findings in the literature, there is a research gap in understanding its role in injury.

Objectives: This scoping review explores running variability's influence on injury susceptibility, examining studies across various injury types, skill levels, methods, and analysis adhering to the guidelines outlined in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews checklist (PRISMA-ScR). Eligibility criteria and sources of evidence: Twenty-one studies illustrating the complexity of running variability in relation to running-related injuries were selected from Web of Science, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, and PubMed databases during December 2022 to June 2024.

Results: There are significant differences in running variability between injured and healthy runners, with variability influenced by injury type, stage, and individual differences with varying levels of evidence. Out of 21 studies, 8 (38%) found no group differences, 11 (52%) noted higher running variability in injured participants, and 5 (24%) reported lower variability in injured than healthy subjects. The review was constrained by the diverse subjects, methods, tasks, and outcome variables across the studies.

Conclusions: Currently, there is no standard normal range for running variability and abnormal variability is defined relative to control groups, though healthy controls can also show abnormal variability without injury in some study designs. Despite the absence of standardized running variability norms, wearable sensors offer insights into real-world running mechanics, presenting running variability as a potential predictor of running-related injuries. The review highlights the need for standardized protocols and further research to clarify running variability's role in injury prediction and prevention, emphasizing the necessity of individualized approaches in training and rehabilitation. Future studies should aim to establish a causal relationship between running variability and injury susceptibility, focusing on identifying variability patterns that precede or follow an injury. This review sets the stage for developing evidence-based strategies to optimize running performance and minimize injury risks.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Sports
Sports SPORT SCIENCES-
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
7.40%
发文量
167
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信