Biomechanical parameters are often analyzed independently, although running gait is a dynamic system wherein changes in one parameter are likely to affect another. Accordingly, the Volodalen® method provides a model for classifying running patterns into 2 categories, aerial and terrestrial, using a global subjective rating scoring system. We aimed to validate the Volodalen® method by verifying whether the aerial and terrestrial patterns, defined subjectively by a running coach, were associated with distinct objectively-measured biomechanical parameters. The running patterns of 91 individuals were assessed subjectively using the Volodalen® method by an expert running coach during a 10-min running warm-up. Biomechanical parameters were measured objectively using the OptojumpNext® during a 50-m run performed at 3.3, 4.2, and 5 m·s(-1) and were compared between aerial- and terrestrial-classified subjects. Longer contact times and greater leg compression were observed in the terrestrial compared to the aerial runners. The aerial runners exhibited longer flight time, greater center of mass displacement, maximum vertical force and leg stiffness than the terrestrial ones. The subjective categorization of running patterns was associated with distinct objectively-quantified biomechanical parameters. Our results suggest that a subjective holistic assessment of running patterns provides insight into the biomechanics of running gaits of individuals.
Accelerometer-based systems are often used to quantify human movement. This study's aim was to assess the reliability and validity of the Myotest® accelerometer-based system for measuring running stride kinematics. Twenty habitual runners ran two 60 m trials at 12, 15, 18 and 21 km·h(-1). Contact time, aerial time and step frequency parameters from six consecutive running steps of each trial were extracted using Myotest® data. Between-trial reproducibility of measures was determined by comparing kinematic parameters from the two runs performed at the same speed. Myotest® measures were compared against photocell-based (Optojump Next®) and high-frequency video data to establish concurrent validity. The Myotest®-derived parameters were highly reproducible between trials at all running speeds (intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC): 0.886 to 0.974). Compared to the photo-cell and high-speed video-based measures, the mean contact times from the Myotest® were 34% shorter and aerial times were 64% longer. Only step frequency was comparable between systems and demonstrated high between-system correlation (ICC ≥ 0.857). The Myotest® is a practical portable device that is reliable for measuring contact time, aerial time and step frequency during running. In terms of validity, it provides accurate step frequency measures but underestimates contact time and overestimates aerial time compared to photocell- and optical-based systems.