U.S. Army conducts large-scale foot strike study

The U.S. Army has completed the first large-scale study on the relationship between foot strike patterns and overuse injury rates. The conclusion seems to be that there isn’t much of a relationship.

It may seem strange that the U.S. Army conducted the study, but as part of their career, servicemen and women have to run and keep fit. It’s in the army’s interest to keep their ranks healthy and on their feet, so learning what causes injuries makes sense.

The debate over whether heel striking or forefoot striking is superior has had no shortage of research done on it, but the sample sizes of these studies often fall on the low side, meaning the results are less reliable. In general, the more subjects observed in the study, the more useful the data is.

The army has no shortage of subjects to draw from. They had 1,027 of their soldiers run by a high-speed camera and analyzed if they were forefoot striking or heel striking. Subjects then self-reported their injuries from the previous 12 months and the results were compared.

Overall, 83 per cent of the runners were heel strikers, but the rate of overuse injuries between the heel strike group and forefoot strike group wasn’t significant. Also, women seemed to have a higher rate of overuse injuries, but the difference didn’t seem to have any relationship with injury rates.

The researchers will be presenting their findings at the end of the month at American College of Sports Medicine’s annual meeting.