Motor Learning In Running Gait Retraining: Not As Easy As It Sounds?

Gait-retraining studies often focus on the immediate effects of impact reduction in distance running. Here, we took an extended approach and determined whether lower-impact running persists half a year after completing a retraining program based on biofeedback. PURPOSE: To evaluate motor learning and recall effects following a biofeedback-based retraining program. METHODS: A 6-month follow-up of a quasi-randomized controlled trial was performed with and without verbal cueing (i.e., run as at the end of the program) to evaluate recall and learning, respectively. Twenty runners were assigned to experimental or control groups and completed a 3-week running program. A wearable system collected axial tibial acceleration and provided real-time feedback on peak tibial acceleration for six running sessions in an athletic training facility. The experimental group received music-based biofeedback in a faded feedback scheme. The controls received tempo-synchronized music as a placebo for blinding purposes. The peak tibial acceleration and vertical loading rate of the ground reaction force were determined in a biomechanics lab at baseline and six months following the intervention to assess learning and recall. RESULTS: The impacts of the experimental group substantially decreased at follow-up following a simple verbal recall: peak tibial acceleration:-32%, p = 0.018; vertical loading rate:-34%, p = 0.006. No statistically significant changes were found regarding the retention of the impact variables (Table 1). The impact magnitudes did not change over time in the control group. CONCLUSION: The biofeedback-based intervention did not induce clear learning at follow-up, however, a substantial impact reduction was recallable through simple cueing in the absence of biofeedback. Table 1. - Impact variables for the experimental (n = 8) and control (n = 10) groups. Descriptives are presented as mean (±SD). Variable Group Baseline Retention Recall Baseline-Retention Baseline-Recall Peak Tibial Acceleration Axial (g) Experimental 7.93(±1.87) 6.15(±0.95) 5.50(±1.13) MD = -1.78 P = 0.110d = 0.949 t = 2.862 MD = -2.43 P = 0.007*d = 1.295 t = 3.905 Control 7.23(±2.16) 6.91(±2.07) 6.79(±2.34) MD = - 0.31P = 1.000d = 0.167 t = 0.561 MD = - 0.44 P = 1.000d = 0.232 t = 0.782 Maximum Instantaneous Vertical Loading Rate (BW/s) Experimental 96.3(±28.0) 84.4(±22.5) 65.8(±18.7) MD = -11.8 P = 1.000d = 0.462 t = 1.636 MD = -30.5 P = 0.003*d = 1.195 t = 4.231 Control 81.7(±22.0) 85.0(±30.2) 78.2(±28.6) MD = 3.3 P = 1.000d = -0.128 t = -0.505 MD = -3.5 P = 1.000d = 0.137 t = 0.542 MD: Mean Difference. d: Cohen’s d. * P < 0.05. FWO, EU-Interreg