Evaluating footwear “in the wild”: Examining wrap and lace trail shoe closures during trail running

Trail running participation has grown over the last two decades. As a result, there have been an increasing number of studies examining the sport. Despite these increases, there is a lack of understanding regarding the effects of footwear on trail running biomechanics in ecologically valid conditions. The purpose of our study was to evaluate how a Wrap vs. Lace closure (on the same shoe) impacts running biomechanics on a trail. Thirty subjects ran a trail loop in each shoe while wearing a global positioning system (GPS) watch, heart rate monitor, inertial measurement units (IMUs), and plantar pressure insoles. The Wrap closure reduced peak foot eversion velocity (measured via IMU), which has been associated with fit. The Wrap closure also increased heel contact area, which is also associated with fit. This increase may be associated with the subjective preference for the Wrap. Lastly, runners had a small but significant increase in running speed in the Wrap shoe with no differences in heart rate nor subjective exertion. In total, the Wrap closure fit better than the Lace closure on a variety of terrain. This study demonstrates the feasibility of detecting meaningful biomechanical differences between footwear features in the wild using statistical tools and study design. Evaluating footwear in ecologically valid environments often creates additional variance in the data. This variance should not be treated as noise; instead, it is critical to capture this additional variance and challenges of ecologically valid terrain if we hope to use biomechanics to impact the development of new products

Epidemiology of Injury in English Women's Super league Football: A Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION: The epidemiology of injury in male professional football has been well documented (Ekstrand, Hägglund, & Waldén, 2011) and used as a basis to understand injury trends for a number of years. The prevalence and incidence of injuries occurring in womens super league football is unknown. The aim of this study is to estimate the prevalence and incidence of injury in an English Super League Women’s Football squad. METHODS: Following ethical approval from Leeds Beckett University, players (n = 25) signed to a Women’s Super League Football club provided written informed consent to complete a self-administered injury survey. Measures of exposure, injury and performance over a 12-month period was gathered. Participants were classified as injured if they reported a football injury that required medical attention or withdrawal from participation for one day or more. Injuries were categorised as either traumatic or overuse and whether the injury was a new injury and/or re-injury of the same anatomical site RESULTS: 43 injuries, including re-injury were reported by the 25 participants providing a clinical incidence of 1.72 injuries per player. Total incidence of injury was 10.8/1000 h (95% CI: 7.5 to 14.03). Participants were at higher risk of injury during a match compared with training (32.4 (95% CI: 15.6 to 48.4) vs 8.0 (95% CI: 5.0 to 10.85)/1000 hours, p 28 days) of which there were three non-contact anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries. The epidemiological incidence proportion was 0.80 (95% CI: 0.64 to 0.95) and the average probability that any player on this team will sustain at least one injury was 80.0% (95% CI: 64.3% to 95.6%) CONCLUSION: This is the first report capturing exposure and injury incidence by anatomical site from a cohort of English players and is comparable to that found in Europe (6.3/1000 h (95% CI 5.4 to 7.36) Larruskain et al 2017). The number of ACL injuries highlights a potential injury burden for a squad of this size. Multi-site prospective investigations into the incidence and prevalence of injury in women’s football are require

Design revolutions: IASDR 2019 Conference Proceedings. Volume 4: Learning, Technology, Thinking

In September 2019 Manchester School of Art at Manchester Metropolitan University was honoured to host the bi-annual conference of the International Association of Societies of Design Research (IASDR) under the unifying theme of DESIGN REVOLUTIONS. This was the first time the conference had been held in the UK. Through key research themes across nine conference tracks – Change, Learning, Living, Making, People, Technology, Thinking, Value and Voices – the conference opened up compelling, meaningful and radical dialogue of the role of design in addressing societal and organisational challenges. This Volume 4 includes papers from Learning, Technology and Thinking tracks of the conference

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Incidence of Injury in Professional Female Soccer

The epidemiology of injury in male professional football is well documented and has been used as a basis to monitor injury trends and implement injury prevention strategies. There are no systematic reviews that have investigated injury incidence in women’s professional football. Therefore, the extent of injury burden in women’s professional football remains unknown. PURPOSE: The primary aim of this study was to calculate an overall incidence rate of injury in senior female professional soccer. The secondary aims were to provide an incidence rate for training and match play. METHODS: PubMed, Discover, EBSCO, Embase and ScienceDirect electronic databases were searched from inception to September 2018. Two reviewers independently assessed study quality using the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology statement using a 22-item STROBE checklist. Seven prospective studies (n=1137 professional players) were combined in a pooled analysis of injury incidence using a mixed effects model. Heterogeneity was evaluated using the Cochrane Q statistic and I2. RESULTS: The epidemiological incidence proportion over one season was 0.62 (95% CI 0.59 - 0.64). Mean total incidence of injury was 3.15 (95% CI 1.54 - 4.75) injuries per 1000 hours. The mean incidence of injury during match play was 10.72 (95% CI 9.11 - 12.33) and during training was 2.21 (95% CI 0.96 - 3.45). Data analysis found a significant level of heterogeneity (total Incidence, X2 = 16.57 P < 0.05; I2 = 63.8%) and during subsequent sub group analyses in those studies reviewed (match incidence, X2 = 76.4 (d.f. = 7), P <0.05; I2 = 90.8%, training incidence, X2 = 16.97 (d.f. = 7), P < 0.05; I2 = 58.8%). Appraisal of the study methodologies revealed inconsistency in the use of injury terminology, data collection procedures and calculation of exposure by researchers. Such inconsistencies likely contribute to the large variance in the incidence and prevalence of injury reported. CONCLUSIONS: The estimated risk of sustaining at least one injury over one football season is 62%. Continued reporting of heterogeneous results in population samples limits meaningful comparison of studies. Standardising the criteria used to attribute injury and activity coupled with more accurate methods of calculating exposure will overcome such limitations