European Journal of Applied Physiology

, Volume 115, Issue 5, pp 911–918 | Cite as

Shoe drop has opposite influence on running pattern when running overground or on a treadmill

  • Nicolas ChambonEmail author
  • Nicolas Delattre
  • Nils Guéguen
  • Eric Berton
  • Guillaume Rao
Original Article



Minimalist running shoes are designed to induce a foot strike made more with the forepart of the foot. The main changes made on minimalist shoe consist in decreasing the height difference between fore and rear parts of the sole (drop). Barefoot and shod running have been widely compared on overground or treadmill these last years, but the key characteristic effects of minimalist shoes have been yet little studied. The purpose of this study is to find whether the shoe drop has the same effect regardless of the task: overground or treadmill running.


Twelve healthy male subjects ran with three shoes of different drops (0, 4, 8 mm) and barefoot on a treadmill and overground. Vertical ground reaction force (vGRF) (transient peak and loading rate) and lower limb kinematics (foot, ankle and knee joint flexion angles) were observed.


Opposite footwear effects on loading rate between the tasks were observed. Barefoot running induced higher loading rates during overground running than the highest drop condition, while it was the opposite during treadmill running. Ankle plantar flexion and knee flexion angles at touchdown were higher during treadmill than overground running for all conditions, except for barefoot which did not show any difference between the tasks.


Shoe drop appears to be a key parameter influencing running pattern, but its effects on vGRF differ depending on the task (treadmill vs. overground running) and must be considered with caution. Unlike shod conditions, kinematics of barefoot condition was not altered by treadmill running explaining opposite conclusions between the tasks.


Footwear Barefoot Foot strike Ground reaction force Kinematics 



Barefoot condition


Body weight


0 mm shoe drop condition


4 mm shoe drop condition


8 mm shoe drop condition


European Union


Ethylene-vinyl acetate


Ground reaction force


Vertical ground reaction force


Conflict of interest

All authors disclose that there is no conflict of interest regarding this study.


  1. Altman AR, Davis IS (2012) A kinematic method for footstrike pattern detection in barefoot and shod runners. Gait Posture 35(2):298–300CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson FC, Pandy MG (1999) A dynamic optimization solution for vertical jumping in three dimensions. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin 2(3):201–231CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bishop M, Fiolkowski P, Conrad B, Brunt D, Horodyski MB (2006) Athletic footwear, leg stiffness, and running kinematics. J Athl Train 41(4):387–392PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Cavanagh PR, Lafortune MA (1980) Ground reaction forces in distance running. J Biomech 13(5):397–406CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Chambon N, Delattre N, Guéguen N, Berton E, Rao G (2014) Is midsole thickness a key parameter for the running pattern? Gait Posture 40(1):58–63CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Cheung RT, Rainbow MJ (2014) Landing pattern and vertical loading rates during first attempt of barefoot running in habitual shod runners. Hum Mov Sci 34(120):127Google Scholar
  7. Daoud AI, Geissler GJ, Wang F, Saretsky J, Daoud YA, Lieberman DE (2012) Foot strike and injury rates in endurance runners: a retrospective study. Med Sci Sports Exerc 44(7):1325–1334CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. De Wit B, De Clercq D, Aerts P (2000) Biomechanical analysis of the stance phase during barefoot and shod running. J Biomech 33(269):278Google Scholar
  9. Delattre N, Chambon N, Berton E, Gueguen N, Rao G (2013) Effect of time during a running session with minimal footwear. Footwear Sci 5(Suppl 1):S113–S114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Delp SL, Anderson FC, Arnold AS, Loan P, Habib A, Guendelman E, Thelen DG (2007) OpenSim: open-source software to create and analyze dynamic simulations of movement. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 54(11):1940–1950CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Dingwell JB, Cusumano JP, Cavanagh PR, Sternad D (2001) Local dynamic stability versus kinematic variability of continuous overground and treadmill walking. J Biomech Eng 123(1):27–32CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Divert C, Mornieux G, Baur F, Mayer F, Belli A (2005) Mechanical comparison of barefoot and shod running. Int J Sports Med 26(7):593–598CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Divert C, Mornieux G, Freychat P, Baly L, Mayer F, Belli A (2008) Barefoot-shod running differences: shoe or mass effect? Int J Sports Med 29(6):512–518CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Duquette AM, Andrews DM (2010) Comparing methods of quantifying tibial acceleration slope. J Appl Biomech 26(2):229–233PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Fellin RE, Manal K, Davis IS (2010) Comparison of lower extremity kinematic curves during overground and treadmill running. J Appl Biomech 26(4):407–414PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Fukano M, Nagano Y, Ida H, Fukubayashi T (2009) Change in tibial rotation of barefoot versus shod running. Footwear Sci 1(1):19–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gerritsen KG, van den Bogert AJ, Nigg BM (1995) Direct dynamics simulation of the impact phase in heel-toe running. J Biomech 28(6):661–668CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Hamill J, Russel EM, Gruber AH, Miller R (2011) Impact characteristics in shod and barefoot running. Footwear Sci 3(1):33–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hamner SR, Seth A, Delp SL (2010) Muscle contributions to propulsion and support during running. J Biomech 43(14):2709–2716CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Hollander K, Riebe D, Campe S, Braumann KM, Zech A (2014) Effects of footwear on treadmill running biomechanics in preadolescent children. Gait Posture 40(3):381–385CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Horvais N, Samozino P (2013) Effect of midsole geometry on foot-stike pattern and running kinematics. Footwear Sci 5(2):81–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hreljac A, Marshall RN, Hume PA (2000) Evaluation of lower extremity overuse injury potential in runners. Med Sci Sports Exerc 32(9):1635–1641CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Kadaba MP, Ramakrishnan HK, Wootten ME (1990) Measurement of lower extremity kinematics during level walking. J Orthop Res 8(3):383–392CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Lieberman DE, Venkadesan M, Werbel WA, Daoud AI, D’Andrea S, Davis IS, Ojiambo Mang’Eni R, Pitsiladis Y (2010) Foot strike patterns and collision forces in habitually barefoot versus shod runners. Nature 463(7280):531–535CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Lussiana T, Hébert-Losier H, Mourot L (2014) Effect of minimal shoes and slope on vertical and leg stiffness during running. J Sport Health Sci. doi: 10.1016/j.jshs.2013.09.004 Google Scholar
  26. Milner CE, Ferber R, Pollard CD, Hamill J, Davis IS (2006) Biomechanical factors associated with tibial stress fracture in female runners. Med Sci Sports Exerc 38(2):323–328CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Nigg BM, De Boer RW, Fisher V (1995) A kinematic comparison of overground and treadmill running. Med Sci Sports Exerc 27(1):98–105PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Paquette MR, Zhang S, Baumgartner DL (2013) Acute effects of barefoot, minimal shoes and running shoes on lower limb mechanics in rear and forefoot strike runners. Footwear Sci 5(1):9–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pohl MB, Hamill J, Davis IS (2009) Biomechanical and anatomic factors associated with a history of plantar fasciitis in female runners. Clin J Sport Med 19(5):372–376CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Shih Y, Lin KL, Shiang TY (2013) Is the foot striking pattern more important than barefoot or shod conditions in running? Gait Posture 38(3):490–494CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Squadrone R, Galozzi C (2009) Biomechanical and physiological comparison of barefoot and two shod conditions in experienced barefoot runners. J Sports Med Phys Fit 49(1):6–13Google Scholar
  32. Squadrone R, Galozzi C (2011) Effect of a five-toed minimal protection shoe on static and dynamic ankle position sense. J Sports Med Phys Fit 51(3):401–408Google Scholar
  33. TenBroek TM, Rodrigues P, Frederick EC, Hamill J (2013) Effects of unknown footwear midsole thickness on running kinematics within the initial six minutes of running. Footwear Sci 5(1):27–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Willy RW, Davis IS (2014) Kinematic and kinetic comparison of running in standard and minimalist shoes. Med Sci Sports Exerc 46(2):318–323CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nicolas Chambon
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Nicolas Delattre
    • 2
  • Nils Guéguen
    • 2
  • Eric Berton
    • 1
  • Guillaume Rao
    • 1
  1. 1.Aix-Marseille University, CNRS, ISM UMR 7287Marseille Cedex 09France
  2. 2.Oxylane Research, Decathlon CampusVilleneuve d’AscqFrance

Personalised recommendations