“Studies show that heel runners have an overall injury rate that is approximately twice as high compared to forefoot runners,” claims computer science Professor Dr. Antonio Krüger, at Saarland University in Saarbrücken, Germany.
Zapping Calf Muscle to Cut Runner Injuries
1 min read Premium comments
Secondary#runninginjury#runners
Krüger also questions whether runners can learn a new movement through information technology alone.
“An effective analysis of running technique can only be provided by professionals or expert coaches using slow-motion videos. Amateur athletes have no access to this. However, as more and more people run long distances, exposing themselves to the risk of knee injuries and stress fractures, answering this question is more necessary than ever before,” he says.
Krüger’s contribution to answering that question is a device he invented called the “Footstriker.”
As he explains, the device “is worn by the runner on the body and ensures the correct movement with the help of electro-stimulation (EMS). The painless electrical surge come from electrodes that the runner sticks to his calf. The runner also carries the necessary EMS generator and the control unit, an Arduino microcontroller, on his body. In the shoes are insoles that are equipped with pressure sensors. The sensors allow researchers to see not only whether the runner is striking with the heel, middle or forefoot, but also whether the foot is straight on the ground or in the air. If the foot is in the air and the heel has previously been recognized, the control unit sends a faint, painless current into the calf muscle which moves the foot forward. The runner now strikes with the middle or forefoot, protecting his health and running more efficiently.”
The computer scientists have tested their running assistant on 18 people between the ages of 24 and 36 years. They claim “that using Footstriker during a run over three kilometers leads to significantly fewer heel-first strikes compared to the voice commands of a personal trainer.”
“After the run with Footstriker we interviewed the runners. The result: They could describe the new, correct movement in their own words, although we had not provided any information about it. Obviously, they had learned it only with the help of the running assistant,” reports Krüger.
React:
Discussion
This is a fascinating development. In my practice we've seen similar outcomes with the revised protocol. The key differentiator seems to be patient selection criteria. Has anyone else noticed the correlation with BMI thresholds?
Great point. I'd push back slightly on the conclusion, the sample size in the cited study is too small to draw population-level inferences. That said, the directional signal is compelling and worth a larger RCT.
We implemented a similar approach last year. Early results are promising but we're still gathering 12-month follow-up data. Happy to share our protocol if anyone is interested.
Join the conversation
Orthopedic professionals are discussing this. Sign in and upgrade to read every comment and add your voice.