Abstract
In the quest to uncover the underlying mechanisms responsible for the performance-enhancing benefits imparted by advanced footwear technology (AFT), footwear researchers are employing an individual-level approach. In doing so, they hope to unveil individual-specific responses to AFT otherwise masked by a group-level approach. Classifying an individual’s response on the basis of running economy (RE) is a logical strategy given that the intended purpose of AFT is to enhance performance; however, caution should be taken when doing so. Metabolic measurement devices are far from perfect, and given the known errors associated with metabolic measurements we would like to reiterate a suggestion first made 40 years ago: when seeking to quantify the interindividual variability of improvement in RE associated with running in AFT, the best practice is to rely on a minimum of two same-day measurements of RE.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Technical error of measurement (TEM) is calculated from the difference within each pair of measurements (D), and the number of measurement pairs (N) [32]: \({\text{TEM}} = \sqrt {\frac{{\sum D^{2} }}{2N}}\).
References
Frederick EC. Let’s just call it advanced footwear technology (AFT). Footwear Sci. 2022;14:131–131.
Barnes KR, Kilding AE. A randomized crossover study investigating the running economy of highly-trained male and female distance runners in marathon racing shoes versus track spikes. Sports Med. 2019;49:331–42.
Hoogkamer W, Kipp S, Frank JH, Farina EM, Luo G, Kram R. A comparison of the energetic cost of running in marathon racing shoes. Sports Med. 2018;48:1009–19.
Hunter I, McLeod A, Valentine D, Low T, Ward J, Hager R. Running economy, mechanics, and marathon racing shoes. J Sports Sci. 2019;37:2367–73.
Bermon S, Garrandes F, Szabo A, Berkovics I, Adami PE. Effect of advanced shoe technology on the evolution of road race times in male and female elite runners. Front Sports Act Living. 2021;3: 653173.
Rodrigo-Carranza V, González-Mohíno F, Santos-Concejero J, González-Ravé JM. Impact of advanced footwear technology on elite men's in the evolution of road race performance. J Sports Sci. 2022;40(23):2661–8.
Senefeld JW, Haischer MH, Jones AM, Wiggins CC, Beilfuss R, Joyner MJ, et al. Technological advances in elite marathon performance. J Appl Physiol. 2021;130:2002–8.
Nigg B, Cigoja S, Nigg SR. Effects of running shoe construction on performance in long distance running. Footwear Sci. 2020;12:133–8.
Ortega JA, Healey LA, Swinnen W, Hoogkamer W. Energetics and biomechanics of running footwear with increased longitudinal bending stiffness: a narrative review. Sports Med. 2021;51:873–94.
Rodrigo-Carranza V, González-Mohíno F, Santos-Concejero J, González-Ravé JM. The effects of footwear midsole longitudinal bending stiffness on running economy and ground contact biomechanics: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Sport Sci. 2022;22(10):1508–21.
Patoz A, Lussiana T, Breine B, Gindre C. The Nike Vaporfly 4%: a game changer to improve performance without biomechanical explanation yet. Footwear Sci. 2022;14:147–50.
Day E, Hahn M. Optimal footwear longitudinal bending stiffness to improve running economy is speed dependent. Footwear Sci. 2020;12:3–13.
McLeod AR, Bruening D, Johnson AW, Ward J, Hunter I. Improving running economy through altered shoe bending stiffness across speeds. Footwear Sci. 2020;12:79–89.
Chollet M, Michelet S, Horvais N, Pavailler S, Giandolini M. Individual physiological responses to changes in shoe bending stiffness: a cluster analysis study on 96 runners. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2022;2022:1–9.
Roy JPR, Stefanyshyn DJ. Shoe midsole longitudinal bending stiffness and running economy, joint energy, and EMG. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2006;38:562–9.
Madden R, Sakaguchi M, Tomaras EK, Wannop JW, Stefanyshyn D. Forefoot bending stiffness, running economy and kinematics during overground running. Footwear Sci. 2016;8:91–8.
Willwacher S, König M, Braunstein B, Goldmann JP, Brüggemann GP. The gearing function of running shoe longitudinal bending stiffness. Gait Posture. 2014;40:386–90.
Clermont CA, Durante G, Barrons ZB, Wannop JW, Stefanyshyn D. The relationship between foot arch stiffness, midsole bending stiffness, and running economy: 2185. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2022;54:634.
Oh K, Park S. The bending stiffness of shoes is beneficial to running energetics if it does not disturb the natural MTP joint flexion. J Biomech. 2017;53:127–35.
Rodrigo-Carranza V, Hoogkamer W, Salinero JJ, Rodríguez-Barbero S, González-Ravé JM, González-Mohíno F. Influence of Running Shoe Longitudinal Bending Stiffness on Running Economy and Performance in Trained and National Level Runners. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2023;55(12):2290–8.
Tung KD, Franz JR, Kram R. A test of the metabolic cost of cushioning hypothesis during unshod and shod running. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2014;46:324–9.
Daniels J, Scardina N, Hayes J, Poley P. Variations in VO2 submax during treadmill running. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1984;16:108.
Morgan DW, Martin PE, Krahenbuhl GS, Baldini FD. Variability in running economy and mechanics among trained male runners. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1991;23:378–83.
Saunders PU, Pyne DB, Telford RD, Hawley JA. Reliability and variability of running economy in elite distance runners. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2004;36:1972–6.
Shaw AJ, Ingham SA, Fudge BW, Folland JP. The reliability of running economy expressed as oxygen cost and energy cost in trained distance runners. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2013;38:1268–72.
LetsRun.com. Sports Scientists Ross Tucker and Geoff Burns react to Tigst Assefa’s amazing 2:11:53 marathon world record [Internet]. LetsRun.com. 2023 [cited 2023 Nov 16]. Available from: https://www.letsrun.com/news/2023/09/sports-scientists-ross-tucker-and-geoff-burns-react-to-tigst-assefas-amazing-21153-marathon-world-record/.
Mateo A. What does it mean to be a super shoe “Hyper Responder”? [Internet]. Outs. Online. 2023 [cited 2023 Nov 17]. Available from: https://www.outsideonline.com/running/gear/super-shoe-hyper-responder/.
Sagan C. Broca’s brain: reflections on the romance of science. New York: Random House; 1979.
Batterham A, George K. Reliability in evidence-based clinical practice: a primer for allied health professionals. Phys Ther Sport. 2003;4:122–8.
Hecksteden A, Kraushaar J, Rosenberger F, Theisen D, Senn S, Meyer T. Individual response to exercise training—a statistical perspective. J Appl Physiol (Bethesda Md 1985). 2015;118:jap.00714.2014.
Pickering C, Kiely J. Do Non-Responders to Exercise Exist-and If So, What Should We Do About Them?. Sports Med. 2019;49(1):1–7.
Macfarlane DJ, Wong P. Validity, reliability and stability of the portable Cortex Metamax 3B gas analysis system. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2012;112:2539–47.
Duffield R, Dawson B, Pinnington HC, Wong P. Accuracy and reliability of a Cosmed K4b2 portable gas analysis system. J Sci Med Sport. 2004;7:11–22.
Guidetti L, Meucci M, Bolletta F, Emerenziani GP, Gallotta MC, Baldari C. Validity, reliability and minimum detectable change of COSMED K5 portable gas exchange system in breath-by-breath mode. PLoS ONE. 2018;13: e0209925.
Van Hooren B, Souren T, Bongers BC. Accuracy of respiratory gas variables, substrate, and energy use from 15 CPET systems during simulated and human exercise. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2023;34.
McClung HL, Tharion WJ, Walker LA, Rome MN, Hoyt RW, Looney DP. Using a contemporary portable metabolic gas exchange system for assessing energy expenditure: a validity and reliability study. Sensors. 2023;23:2472.
Kipp S, Grabowski AM, Kram R. What determines the metabolic cost of human running across a wide range of velocities?. J Exp Biol. 2018;221.
Heyde C, Nielsen A, Roecker K, Godsk Larsen R, de Zee M, Kersting U, et al. The percentage of recreational runners that might benefit from new running shoes. A likely scenario. Footwear Sci. 2022;14:163–72.
IOC. Tokyo 2020 men’s marathon results—Olympic athletics [Internet]. Olympics.com. [cited 2023 Nov 16]. Available from: https://olympics.com/en/olympic-games/tokyo-2020/results/athletics/men-s-marathon.
Sullivan GM, Feinn R. Using effect size—or why the P value is not enough. J Grad Med Educ. 2012;4:279–82.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Conflict of interest
Wouter Hoogkamer has received research grants from PUMA and Saucony. No footwear company had any influence on the conceptualization of this article or on the views presented herein.
Availability of data and material
All data are provided in the tables.
Author contributions
WH conceptualized the article. ZBB, VRC, MB, and WH researched and wrote the article.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Barrons, Z.B., Rodrigo-Carranza, V., Bertschy, M. et al. The Fallacy of Single Trials: The Need for Multiple Trials in Assessing Running Economy Responses in Advanced Footwear Technology. Sports Med (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-023-01991-1
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-023-01991-1