Abstract
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.