Posted on

RunEASI wearable enables runners to train and rehabilitate more efficiently

The wearable is worn around the waist.

Being able to exercise without pain or injury: it’s every athlete’s dream as well as the goal of RunEASI, a new spin-off of KU Leuven. RunEASI’s wearable measures the impact experienced by runners and provides scientific feedback that can help them avoid and recover from injuries. The spin-off is supported by the Gemma Frisius Fund and the Freshmen investment fund.

Runners typically use a heart rate monitor, but this device does not offer insight into how the body responds to the impact caused by the feet landing on the ground. And yet, this impact is precisely what determines the risk of injuries. RunEASI – which originated from a collaboration between movement and computer scientists at KU Leuven – has therefore developed a wearable application that does assess these important parameters.

This is achieved using a sensor that is attached to the lower back with a belt and is connected to an app. The sensors measures the impact on the body while running and detects any movement compensations that may occur. The app provides feedback to improve the running pattern. RunEASI is the first application that can perform such an analysis and intervention in a scientifically validated and efficient way. The application will be available on the market as of mid-February 2021.

Stability, symmetry, impact

“We are trying to establish the link between the way in which someone runs, the associated impact loads, and the risk of injuries,” says Professor Benedicte Vanwanseele from the Human Movement Biomechanics unit at KU Leuven. “Three parameters are key to this: stability, symmetry, and impact.”

“Research has shown that trunk instability increases with a runner’s fatigue level. When this is combined with high impact loads, this creates a compensatory pattern that increases the risk of overuse injuries. Symmetry shows whether the impact is equally divided between left and right: after an injury, for instance, a runner may favour one leg without realising it. Last, but not least, the impact parameter shows how the body responds to the shocks that occur when the foot strikes the ground.”

“Our tool intervenes when the data show that the runner has a harmful running pattern,” says computer science professor Jesse Davis. “AI allows us to analyse when the body is exposed to the most severe impacts. This can depend on the surface, the pace, the duration of the training, the runner’s fatigue, and other factors. On the basis of this analysis, coaches and physiotherapists can proactively adjust the runners’ training.”

More insight and better support

“With RunEASI we want to help runners, whether it be professional or recreational ones, to achieve their goals with less risk of injury,” explain co-founders Kurt Schütte (CEO) and Tim Op De Beéck (CTO). “The way our sensor is attached is unique and was developed in cooperation with the orthopaedic experts at Steunzoolpunt. It enables us to measure our new movement metrics very efficiently and accurately. Physiotherapists can use this scientific analysis to better assess when someone is ready to resume training after an injury.”

“We strongly believe in digital tools that improve a person’s quality of life, and this ambition is also reflected in RunEASI,” says Steven Spittaels of the Freshmen investment fund. “It’s an application that, thanks to its scientific feedback, can be of great added value to runners and professional healthcare providers. Athletes obviously want to know how to stay injury free and we want to support RunEASI to help them achieve this.”

“We are extremely grateful for the belief and financial support of the Gemma Frisius Fund and Freshmen Fund,” responds CEO Kurt Schütte. “With their support, we can fulfil our mission and ambition to make the world run better.”

###

More information

The RunEASI wearable can be pre-ordered and will be available as of mid-February 2021. Check the website for further information: runeasi.ai

Posted on

Is the Running Cadence Important?

Inside running community there is often a massive amount of discussion as well as obsession for the running form or method with no shortage of viewpoints, a lot of comments from guru’s with lots of dogma rather than much research to back up nearly all of it. The perspectives from the so-called gurus and how an athlete should actually run can be quite varied and quite often contrary, which can often leave the typical runner rather baffled. There are several factors with the various running methods for instance how and where the foot contacts the ground along with the placement from the leg and pelvis. One that lately got a great deal of focus was the cadence. The cadence is related to how quick the legs turn over, generally calculated as the quantity of steps taken each minute.

There are a number of methods to ascertain the cadence and you will find apps you can use to ascertain the cadence. It’s just a matter of keeping track of the number of steps the athlete normally takes in a time period and after that standardizing that to 1 minute. There was clearly just lately an increasing movement touting for athletes to cut short their step length while increasing the rate that the legs turn over ie raise the cadence. The dogma was that if you can get the cadence close to 180 steps/minute then that is by some means a significant way to decrease the risk for exercise related injury while increasing performance. This 180 steps/minute was popularized by the well-known running coach Jack Daniels. He based this on his studies of athletes and their step cadences at the 1984 Olympics. Daniels broadly pushed the 180 as an well suited for all runners to shoot for.

Since that time, the research has demonstrated that this cadence in athletes is normally fairly varied with a few as little as 150-160 while others are around 200 steps a minute. It can seem like it is a pretty individual thing with no one best cadence. It can appear that every runner will probably have their very own perfect cadence and will also differ between runners. Shortening the stride length to raise the cadence does appear to have some positive aspects and that’s based on a number of studies, however what is not supported is raising it to that particular mythical 180 that has been widely suggested. It can help with runners that are overstriding and help them learn never to stride so far forward when running. It does seem to assist athletes who have complications with their knees as it can lessen the strains there, but it will however raise the stresses in other places, therefore any alterations needs to be carried out little by little , cautiously and step by step.

What exactly is most significant with regard to runners to know is that this is very individual and it is a matter of working out all on your own or with the assistance of an experienced running technique mentor precisely what is right for you as the individual. One point that has come out around most of the buzz close to cadence would be to not be enticed by the latest trend or expert and try to look for the a lot more reasonable and regarded opinions.

Posted on

Why was barefoot running such a fad?

Barefoot running has been a large novelty about 10 years ago which lasted a couple of years and pulled in a lot of curiosity, particularly in social media. At the end of 2008 to early 2009 there was growing comments that running shoes were really bad for the athletes and was the reason for the vast majority of injuries which athletes were getting. It was despite the phenomenal volume of research and technology which went into creating running shoes to stop these injuries. These claims produced a fad for runners to experiment with running without making use of running shoes and going barefoot or using what become known as minimalist athletic shoes. These kinds of athletic shoes had negligible technology or characteristics within them and were merely a protective covering up of the feet.

The without athletic shoes running fad had been motivated by a substantial existence in social media. There were plenty of web sites, publications, programs, journals and message boards focused on and advocating without running shoes running. A lot of incredible assertions were made for barefoot running as to what it is going to do for the runners. It was believed that up to 25 % of runners may have played around with in some way with without athletic shoes running. Nevertheless, by late 2013 and early 2014 involvement in barefoot running had evaporated away and athletes weren’t any longer enthusiastic about it. This was despite all of the astounding promises that got made in regards to the advantages of the idea as well as the comments from a few that it was about to put the running footwear providers out of business. This never ever happened.

The trend dropped since the claimed advantages rarely accumulated for the vast majority of athletes who attempted it. There initially were a lot of comments made how the science supported without running shoes running, when in actuality there wasn’t any research that demonstrated that it had been better and following research has revealed how the overuse injury incidence in barefoot or minimalist running isn’t lower than people who run in the padded athletic shoes. There was a lot of research carried out on barefoot and minimalist running, however that science failed to show that it turned out any greater, it really indicated that that it was different. The fact that there was a great deal of science which was misinterpreted by individuals who touted barefoot running as showing it had been superior, when that isn’t what it proved.

At the end with the barefoot trend, the Hoka One One running footwear company introduced some maximally cushioned running footwear that were laughed at and loathed by individuals advocating barefoot running. Despite that, runners liked this footwear and the Hoka’s are now a strong player in the running shoe marketplace and since 2014 the trend has been for the much more maximally padded running footwear from all of the running shoe manufacturers.

There is certainly however a little group of hardcore barefoot runners which was always there. At this time the minimalist athletic shoes have made up approximately 0.3-0.5% of the running footwear market for the previous few years. Those maximalist running shoes continue to dominate the marketplace for the past 5-7 years and there is no hint in any drop in their share of the market or a come back of any affinity for barefoot or minimalist running footwear.

Posted on

Why are there running injuries?

Running may seem like a simple activity to take up to increase fitness. However, it’s not necessarily quite as straightforward as it may appear with some research showing that up to three-quarters of runners experience an injury each year. Depending on how bad that injury is and just how it is maintained, many runners just give up and do not continue to run. The reasons for running overuse injury are multifactorial but are linked to issues such as carrying out too much running too soon before allowing your body to adapt to the increased levels of exercise. Inadequate running footwear with design features which do not match up those of the runners requirements may also be a factor. Issues with foot biomechanics as well as the running technique can also be problems at raising the risk for an overuse injury.

An example of a running injury is anterior compartment syndrome. There is fibrous fascia surrounding muscles which contain the muscles in place. In the event that fascia is tight, once we exercise the muscle would want to expand however that tight fascia inhibits it. That pressure within the fascia compartment may be painful. In anterior compartment syndrome, this affects the muscles in the front of the lower leg. The most common reason for this problem is what is known as overstriding. In this the runner is striking the ground with their front leg too far in ahead of the body. To lower the foot to the ground, the anterior leg muscles need to work harder. As they work harder, the muscles expand and if the fascia isn’t going to allow it, then this results in being painful. It will only be painful when running and will not be painful when not running. The easiest method to deal with this problem to use approaches for the runner to shorten their stride length in order that the front foot isn’t going to make contact with the ground too far ahead of the body when running.