Elsevier

Gait & Posture

Volume 38, Issue 2, June 2013, Pages 175-186
Gait & Posture

Review
Impact attenuation during weight bearing activities in barefoot vs. shod conditions: A systematic review

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2012.11.017Get rights and content

Abstract

Although it could be perceived that there is extensive research on the impact attenuation characteristics of shoes, the approach and findings of researchers in this area are varied. This review aimed to clarify the effect of shoes on impact attenuation to the foot and lower leg and was limited to those studies that compared the shoe condition(s) with barefoot. A systematic search of the literature yielded 26 studies that investigated vertical ground reaction force, axial tibial acceleration, loading rate and local plantar pressures. Meta-analyses of the effect of shoes on each variable during walking and running were performed using the inverse variance technique. Variables were collected at their peak or at the impact transient, but when grouped together as previous comparisons have done, shoes reduced local plantar pressure and tibial acceleration, but did not affect vertical force or loading rate for walking. During running, shoes reduced tibial acceleration but did not affect loading rate or vertical force. Further meta-analyses were performed, isolating shoe type and when the measurements were collected. Athletic shoes reduced peak vertical force during walking, but increased vertical force at the impact transient and no change occurred for the other variables. During running, athletic shoes reduced loading rate but did not affect vertical force. The range of variables examined and variety of measurements used appears to be a reason for the discrepancies across the literature. The impact attenuating effect of shoes has potentially both adverse and beneficial effects depending on the variable and activity under investigation.

Highlights

► Few studies on impact attenuation of shoes compared shod condition to barefoot. ► Methodological variations cause discrepancies across literature. ► Shoes in general reduce axial tibial acceleration during walking and running. ► Shoes in general did not affect vGRF or loading rate during walking and running. ► Athletic shoes reduced loading rate during running.

Introduction

With the large amount of research into shoe design, particularly athletic shoes, it could be expected that a substantial body of scientific evidence would be available regarding impact attenuation of shoes compared to barefoot. Weight-bearing activities have a risk of injury to the lower limb through repetitive impact and inadequate recovery [1]. There is an assumption that shoes can provide impact attenuation for the body, protecting the lower limb from repetitive loading during running and jumping through altering the vertical ground reaction force [2] and rate of loading to which the lower limb is exposed [3]. Indeed it has previously been stated that the primary objective of running shoes is to reduce the initial vertical ground reaction force impact transient [4], however the benefit of repetitive loading on the lower limbs for increasing bone mass cannot be ignored [5], [6], [7]. Despite systematic reviews being regarded as the highest level of evidence [8], a systematic review of the effect of shoes on impact attenuation has not previously been undertaken.

The concept that shoes reduce impact force has been implied in shoe advertising, but in the past decade there has been much debate on whether weight-bearing activities should be performed barefoot or shod. A recent trend has seen the appearance of minimalist footwear designs with thinner, flexible shoe soles for the everyday and competitive runner [9]. Altering the shoe design appears to alter shock attenuation, however there have been mixed results across the field.

Common variables used in the literature investigating impact attenuation are vertical ground reaction force, loading rate (rate of loading of vertical force over time), axial tibial acceleration (acceleration along the axis aligned through the shank) and plantar pressures, across the literature the nomenclature for the variables varies, therefore our definitions will be used in this review to provide consistency. Vertical ground reaction force can be collected at the impact transient or the peak value out of the whole stance phase can be used for analysis. The impact transient can be identified by ‘the first vertical impact force peak’ [10] which results from ‘passive’ [11] impact.

The standard method to measure the shock absorbing qualities of footwear is to mechanically compress the shoe at the rearfoot and forefoot sections using a durometer [12]. The shoe can be given a rating of hardness and resistance to compression using an appropriate hardness scale, most commonly the Shore A (used for normal rubber) or the Asker C (used for soft rubber and insoles of differing materials scales) with higher scores given to harder and more highly compression resistant footwear [13]. However, this fails to consider the human interaction with footwear. The studies by Robbins and colleagues examined the technique of landing on shoe midsole materials of different hardness properties [14], [15]. When landing on unfamiliar or uneven surfaces the body will be cautious on the first exposure then adjusts accordingly on subsequent occasions [14], [15], [16], [17], [18]. The body can prepare the lower limbs for impact, adjusting joint stiffness in relation to the perceived hardness of the landing surface [14], [15], [19], but when wearing shoes plantar sensory feedback [18], [20] and proprioception [21] are limited.

The vertical impact transient [22], which occurs just after initial ground contact, is claimed to be the crucial component of the gait cycle [3] as it has an association with repetitive strain injuries in the lower leg [23]. However, Shorten et al. [24] have suggested that previous studies, investigating force attenuation in shoes, are not explaining the differences in vertical ground reaction force adequately. Frequency analysis reveals footwear only contributes a small amount to the impact force at heel strike and load components from more proximal segments could influence the reduction in vertical ground reaction force [24]. While shoes are only one potential factor that could contribute to injury, shoes have the ability to modify biomechanical variables that may assist with reducing injury rates.

Although a previous systematic review found no studies investigating the effect of shoes on injury risk [25] due to strict inclusion criteria, studies have found an association between loading rate [26], [27] and anterior tibial acceleration [28] and the development of musculoskeletal injuries. Proper footwear [29] and impact attenuating boot inserts [30] have been shown to prevent stress fractures through added force attenuation to protect the feet from impact forces. Also, changing footwear was found to be the greatest predictor of foot pain reduction [31]. Repetitive impact force and high loading rates are risk factors for stress fractures particularly if inadequate rest is given between bouts to allow for bone and soft tissue remodelling [32]. However, there is no scientific evidence to demonstrate a direct causal link between impact force and injury, also it is important not to disregard the beneficial properties of weight bearing activity and how repetitive impacts can improve bone mineral density [5], [6], [7] as long as dose and frequency are appropriate.

Many studies have examined shoes and their various effects, but in order to understand the absolute effect of shoes a comparison must be made with the barefoot condition. A systematic review of the current literature is needed to dispel the confusion surrounding the ‘barefoot vs. shod’ debate and discern the true impact attenuation characteristics of shoes compared to the barefoot condition during any weight bearing activity including walking, running and jumping. This review aims to clarify the effect of shoes on the most commonly used variables believed to be associated with impact attenuation to the foot and lower leg. Much of the literature is based on impact attenuation theory with the assumption that more compliant shoes will reduce vertical ground reaction force and delay the time at which the force peak occurs [24]. Hence, impact attenuation will be defined as the capacity to reduce the magnitude of vertical ground reaction force, loading rate, axial tibial acceleration and/or local peak plantar pressures.

Section snippets

Search strategy

A search for the literature was performed in the following databases: Cinahl (1982–September 2011), Cochrane Library (all years), Medline (1950–September 2011), PubMed (all years–September 2011), Scopus (all years–September 2011), SportDiscus (all years–September 2011), Embase (all years–September 2011), Eric (1966–September 2011), Web of Science (1899–September 2011), Ausport (all years–September 2011), AMED (all years–September 2011) and Google Scholar (all years–September 2011). There were

Results

Searching identified 336 studies and 27 studies met the inclusion criteria (Fig. 1). The details of the included studies identifying participant characteristics and shoe conditions tested are shown in Table 1. The shoe types investigated were running/athletic shoes (n = 24), Oxford shoes (n = 5), rocker soled shoes (n = 1), and five-finger shoes (n = 1) [39].

The quality of the studies had a median score of ten out of 14 and ranged from four to twelve (Table 2). Randomisation of the shoe conditions was

Discussion

Initial expectation was the literature search would yield a large amount of studies investigating the impact attenuation properties of cushioned shoes. However, only a small number of these studies actually compared shoes to barefoot, and few studies examined the effect of shoes on weight bearing activities other than walking and running. Despite highly repetitive impacts on the lower leg representing an injury risk and shoes regarded as the prescribed treatment, there is insufficient evidence

Conclusion

There is insufficient evidence to justify a strong conclusion on the beneficial effects of cushioned shoes. The level of scientific evidence required for treatments of other health issues, such as drug trials, needs to be matched in this area of research. Although some studies have found that shoes appear to significantly reduce the impact force on the lower limb during walking and running, the overall stance of the current literature does not support this. Shoes in general reduced axial tibial

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References (82)

  • R. Verdejo et al.

    Heel–shoe interactions and the durability of EVA foam running-shoe midsoles

    Journal of Biomechanics

    (2004)
  • G.S. Keenan et al.

    Lower limb joint kinetics in walking: the role of industry recommended footwear

    Gait & Posture

    (2011)
  • M.A. Lafortune

    Three-dimensional acceleration of the tibia during walking and running

    Journal of Biomechanics

    (1991)
  • D. De Clercq et al.

    The mechanical characteristics of the human heel pad during foot strike in running: an in vivo cineradiographic study

    Journal of Biomechanics

    (1994)
  • M. Lafortune et al.

    Cushioning properties of footwear during walking: accelerometer and force platform measurements

    Clinical Biochemistry

    (1992)
  • K. Webster et al.

    Biomechanical differences in landing with and without shoe wear after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

    Clinical Biochemistry

    (2004)
  • I.C. Wright et al.

    Passive regulation of impact forces in heel-toe running

    Clinical Biochemistry

    (1998)
  • J. Burnfield et al.

    The influence of walking speed and footwear on plantar pressures in older adults

    Clinical Biochemistry

    (2004)
  • D.C. Kerrigan et al.

    The effect of running shoes on lower extremity joint torques

    PM&R

    (2009)
  • J. Burns et al.

    The effect of pes cavus on foot pain and plantar pressure

    Clinical Biochemistry

    (2005)
  • M.A. Lafortune et al.

    Cushioning properties of footwear during walking: accelerometer and force platform measurements

    Clinical Biomechanics

    (1992)
  • G. Bergmann et al.

    Influence of shoes and heel strike on the loading of the hip joint

    Journal of Biomechanics

    (1995)
  • R. Bahr et al.

    Understanding injury mechanisms: a key component of preventing injuries in sport

    BJSM Online

    (2005)
  • S. Logan et al.

    Ground reaction force differences between running shoes, racing flats, and distance spikes in runners

    Journal of Sports Science and Medicine

    (2010)
  • B.M. Nigg et al.

    The influence of lateral heel flare of running shoes on pronation and impact forces

    Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise

    (1987)
  • R.K. Fuchs et al.

    Jumping improves hip and lumbar spine bone mass in prepubescent children: a randomized controlled trial

    Journal of Bone and Mineral Research

    (2001)
  • B. Phillips et al.

    Oxford Centre for evidence-based medicine – levels of evidence

    (2009)
  • D.E. Lieberman et al.

    Foot strike patterns and collision forces in habitually barefoot versus shod runners

    Nature

    (2010)
  • C. Divert et al.

    Mechanical comparison of barefoot and shod running

    International Journal of Sports Medicine

    (2005)
  • ASTM

    D 2240 – 05 standard test method for rubber property – durometer hardness

    (2010)
  • Electromatic Equipment Co. I. Available from:...
  • S. Robbins

    Hazard of deceptive advertising of athletic footwear

    British Journal of Sports Medicine

    (1997)
  • S.E. Robbins et al.

    Athletic footwear: unsafe due to perceptual illusions

    Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise

    (1991)
  • S.E. Robbins et al.

    Running-related injury prevention through innate impact-moderating behavior

    Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise

    (1989)
  • S.E. Robbins et al.

    Overload protection: avoidance response to heavy plantar surface loading

    Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise

    (1988)
  • S.E. Robbins et al.

    Athletic footwear and chronic overloading – a brief review

    Sports Medicine

    (1990)
  • S.E. Robbins et al.

    Running-related injury prevention through barefoot adaptations

    Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise

    (1987)
  • S. Robbins et al.

    Proprioception and stability: foot position awareness as a function of age and footwear

    Age and Ageing

    (1995)
  • M. Shorten et al.

    The ‘heel impact’ force peak during running is neither ‘heel’ nor ‘impact’ and does not quantify shoe cushioning effects

    Footwear Science

    (2011)
  • C. Richards et al.

    Is your prescription of distance running shoes evidence-based?

    British Journal of Sports Medicine

    (2009)
  • C.E. Milner et al.

    Biomechanical factors associated with tibial stress fracture in female runners

    Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise

    (2006)
  • Cited by (42)

    • Locomotion and the foot and ankle

      2023, Behaviour in our Bones: How Human Behaviour Influences Skeletal Morphology
    • Impact attenuation properties of jazz shoes alter lower limb joint stiffness during jump landings

      2017, Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport
      Citation Excerpt :

      Athletic shoe testing has shown that various midsole materials are capable of attenuating impact.9 Investigations into the biomechanical characteristics of weight bearing activities when wearing shoes compared to bare feet yield a variety of results.4 It has been found that changes in muscle activation occur in response to shoe cushioning prior to ground contact10 due to the perception of the hardness of the landing surface,11 and greater impact force when landing on a soft surface during gait and drop landings was due to the body allowing the landing surface to dissipate the impact as opposed to requiring the body to absorb the impact.12

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    1

    Address: K205, C42 - Cumberland Campus, The University of Sydney, Lidcombe, NSW 2141 Australia.

    2

    Address: S224, C42 - Cumberland Campus, The University of Sydney, Lidcombe, NSW 2141 Australia.

    3

    Address: K121, C42 - Cumberland Campus, The University of Sydney, Lidcombe, NSW 2141 Australia.

    4

    Address: K217, C42 - Cumberland Campus, The University of Sydney, Lidcombe, NSW 2141 Australia.

    View full text