Plantar pressure measurements and running-related injury: A systematic review of methods and possible associations

- No standardisation of pressure data analysis exists within RRI research.
- No clear pattern relating plantar pressure data and running injury was identified.
- Pressure insole devices offer the advantage of continuous measurement with shoes.
- Prospective and RCT study designs on RRI in the running environment are warranted.

Pressure-sensitive measuring devices have been identified as appropriate tools for measuring an array of parameters during running. It is unclear which biomechanical characteristics relate to running-related injury (RRI) and which data-processing techniques are most promising to detect this relationship. This systematic review aims to identify pertinent methodologies and characteristics measured using plantar pressure devices, and to summarise their associations with RRI. PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, ScienceDirect and Scopus were searched up until March 2015. Retrospective and prospective, biomechanical studies on running using any kind of pressure-sensitive device with RRI as an outcome were included. All studies involving regular or recreational runners were considered. The study quality was assessed and the measured parameters were summarised. One low quality, two moderate quality and five high quality studies were included. Five different subdivisions of plantar area were identified, as well as five instants and four phases of measurement during foot-ground contact. Overall many parameters were collated and subdivided as plantar pressure and force, plantar pressure and force location, contact area, timing and stride parameters. Differences between the injured and control group were found for mediolateral and anteroposterior displacement of force, contact area, velocity of force displacement, relative force-time integral, mediolateral force ratio, time to peak force and inter-stride correlative patterns. However, no consistent results were found between studies and no biomechanical risk patterns were apparent. Additionally, conflicting findings were reported for peak force in three studies. Based on these observations, we provide suggestions for improved methodology measurement of pertinent parameters for future studies.