Abstract
There is limited validation for portable methods in evaluating high-speed running biomechanics, with inertial measurement unit (IMU) systems commonly used as wearables for this purpose. This study aimed to evaluate the validity of an IMU system in high-speed running compared to a 3D motion analysis system (MAS). One runner performed incremental treadmill running, from 12 to 18 km/h, on two separate days. Sagittal angles for the shank, knee, hip and pelvis were measured simultaneously with three IMUs and the MAS at the point of contact (POC), the timing when the foot initially hits the ground, as identified by IMU system acceleration, and compared to the POC identified via force plate. Agreement between the systems was evaluated using intra-class correlation coefficients, Pearson's r, Bland-Altman limits of agreements, root mean square error and paired t-tests. The IMU system reliably determined POC (which subsequently was used to calculate stride time) and measured hip flexion angle and anterior pelvic tilt accurately and consistently at POC. However, it displayed inaccuracy and inconsistency in measuring knee flexion and shank angles at POC. This information provides confidence that a portable IMU system can aid in establishing baseline running biomechanics for performance optimisation, and/or inform injury prevention programs.