Differences and mechanisms
variables associated with a change in the peak
KFM that were not explored in the present
study. For instance, the lack of spatiotemporal
variables may also differ between conditions
and predict changes in peak KFM. As such,
future studies should consider incorporating
computational neuromusculoskeletal models
to examine footwear-related changes in
musculotendinous forces and internal joint
loads [37] . As there is no gold standard method
of characterizing stability and neutral footwear,
this study utilised the footwear assessment
tool to appraise footwear characteristics
provided by the manufacturer (i.e., medial post)
or subjectively assessed by the researchers
(i.e., torsional, longitudinal and heel counter
stiffness) [17]. Therefore, shoes used in the
present study may not necessarily be classified
as ‘high and ‘low’ support if alternative
methods were used to characterize footwear
type. Furthermore, only one particular brand
of shoes was assessed and findings may not
Conclusions
This study found evidence that running in
commercially available stability and neutral
shoes increased the peak KFM compared
to barefoot in adolescent girls and young
women. Contrary to our hypothesis, there
were no difference in peak KFM between the
two footwear types. A change in peak KFM
was associated with a change in knee-GRF
lever arm, but not to changes in the sagittal-
plane resultant GRF magnitude or sagittal
plane hip, knee or ankle kinematics wearing
shoes compared to barefoot. Future studies
should consider modifying footwear features
to attenuate these higher knee loads in young
females given that higher peak KFM may be
associated with a greater risk of developing
pathological conditions such as PFP. –end
ABBREVIATIONS FUNDING
ANOVA: Analysis of variance KFM: Knee flexion moment This research was supported by an Australian Research
Council (ARC) linkage grant (LP150101041, 2015–
2017) and our industry partner Asics Oceania. TS
was supported by an NHMRC Australian Government
Research Training Program Scholarship (APP1075881). KLB
is the recipient of a NHMRC Principal Research Fellowship
(#1058440). RSH is funded by an ARC Future Fellowship
(FT130100175). ALB is the recipient of a NHMRC Career
Development Fellowship (#1053521).
LPI: Lateral preference inventory AVAILABILITY OF DATA AND MATERIALS
LSD: Least square’s difference, inventory The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the
current study are not publicly available due to the sensitive
nature of materials collected (i.e. pubertal stage) in an
adolescent female cohort but are available from the
corresponding author on reasonable request.
CI: Confidence interval
FAT: Footwear assessment tool
GRF: Ground reaction force
HEAG: Human ethics advisory group
HESC: Human ethics sub-committee
MD: Mean difference
OCP: Oral contraceptive pill
PFP: Patellofemoral pain
32
necessarily generalize to other brands of
footwear.
Pedorthic Footcare Association | www.pedorthics.org