↓ Skip to main content

Physiological and Biomechanical Responses of Highly Trained Distance Runners to Lower-Body Positive Pressure Treadmill Running

Overview of attention for article published in Sports Medicine - Open, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 Mendeley
Title
Physiological and Biomechanical Responses of Highly Trained Distance Runners to Lower-Body Positive Pressure Treadmill Running
Published in
Sports Medicine - Open, November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40798-017-0108-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kyle R. Barnes, Jessica N. Janecke

Abstract

As a way to train at faster running speeds, add training volume, prevent injury, or rehabilitate after an injury, lower-body positive pressure treadmills (LBPPT) have become increasingly commonplace among athletes. However, there are conflicting evidence and a paucity of data describing the physiological and biomechanical responses to LBPPT running in highly trained or elite caliber runners at the running speeds they habitually train at, which are considerably faster than those of recreational runners. Furthermore, data is lacking regarding female runners' responses to LBPPT running. Therefore, this study was designed to evaluate the physiological and biomechanical responses to LBPPT running in highly trained male and female distance runners. Fifteen highly trained distance runners (seven male; eight female) completed a single running test composed of 4 × 9-min interval series at fixed percentages of body weight ranging from 0 to 30% body weight support (BWS) in 10% increments on LBPPT. The first interval was always conducted at 0% BWS; thereafter, intervals at 10, 20, and 30% BWS were conducted in random order. Each interval consisted of three stages of 3 min each, at velocities of 14.5, 16.1, and 17.7 km·h(-1) for men and 12.9, 14.5, and 16.1 km·h(-1) for women. Expired gases, ventilation, breathing frequency, heart rate (HR), rating of perceived exertion (RPE), and stride characteristics were measured during each running speed and BWS. Male and female runners had similar physiological and biomechanical responses to running on LBPPT. Increasing BWS increased stride length (p < 0.02) and flight duration (p < 0.01) and decreased stride rate (p < 0.01) and contact time (p < 0.01) in small-large magnitudes. There was a large attenuation of oxygen consumption (VO2) relative to BWS (p < 0.001), while there were trivial-moderate reductions in respiratory exchange ratio, minute ventilation, and respiratory frequency (p > 0.05), and small-large effects on HR and RPE (p < 0.01). There were trivial-small differences in VE, respiratory frequency, HR, and RPE for a given VO2 across various BWS (p > 0.05). The results indicate the male and female distance runners have similar physiological and biomechanical responses to LBPPT running. Overall, the biomechanical changes during LBPPT running all contributed to less metabolic cost and corresponding physiological changes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 53 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 17%
Student > Bachelor 9 17%
Student > Master 7 13%
Researcher 6 11%
Student > Postgraduate 3 6%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 13 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 11 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Engineering 2 4%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 18 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 November 2017.
All research outputs
#20,452,930
of 23,008,860 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine - Open
#467
of 477 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#372,570
of 437,733 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine - Open
#13
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,008,860 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 477 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 437,733 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.