The design of the run Clever randomized trial: running volume, -intensity and running-related injuries

Daniel Ramskov, Rasmus Oestergaard Nielsen, Henrik Sørensen, Erik Parner, Martin Lind, Sten Rasmussen, Daniel Ramskov, Rasmus Oestergaard Nielsen, Henrik Sørensen, Erik Parner, Martin Lind, Sten Rasmussen

Abstract

Background: Injury incidence and prevalence in running populations have been investigated and documented in several studies. However, knowledge about injury etiology and prevention is needed. Training errors in running are modifiable risk factors and people engaged in recreational running need evidence-based running schedules to minimize the risk of injury. The existing literature on running volume and running intensity and the development of injuries show conflicting results. This may be related to previously applied study designs, methods used to quantify the performed running and the statistical analysis of the collected data. The aim of the Run Clever trial is to investigate if a focus on running intensity compared with a focus on running volume in a running schedule influences the overall injury risk differently.

Methods/design: The Run Clever trial is a randomized trial with a 24-week follow-up. Healthy recreational runners between 18 and 65 years and with an average of 1-3 running sessions per week the past 6 months are included. Participants are randomized into two intervention groups: Running schedule-I and Schedule-V. Schedule-I emphasizes a progression in running intensity by increasing the weekly volume of running at a hard pace, while Schedule-V emphasizes a progression in running volume, by increasing the weekly overall volume. Data on the running performed is collected by GPS. Participants who sustain running-related injuries are diagnosed by a diagnostic team of physiotherapists using standardized diagnostic criteria. The members of the diagnostic team are blinded. The study design, procedures and informed consent were approved by the Ethics Committee Northern Denmark Region (N-20140069).

Discussion: The Run Clever trial will provide insight into possible differences in injury risk between running schedules emphasizing either running intensity or running volume. The risk of sustaining volume- and intensity-related injuries will be compared in the two intervention groups using a competing risks approach. The trial will hopefully result in a better understanding of the relationship between the running performed and possible differences in running-related injury risk and the injuries developed.

Trial registration: Clinical Trials NCT02349373 - January 23, 2015.

Keywords: Athletic injuries; Injury prevention; Leg injuries; Musculoskeletal pain; Recreational runners; Running; Running intensity; Running schedule; Running volume; Running-related Injuries.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow-chart of outline of the RUN CLEVER trial
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Development of the intervention during the entire follow-up. Volume (km/week) is the weekly total running volume. Intensity (km/week at moderate-hard pace) is the amount of kilometers at an intensity higher than 81 % VO2max. Schedule Intensity (blue) is focused on increasing the running intensity. Schedule Volume (grey) is focused on increasing the running volume
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Follow-up measurements during the 24 weeks. The OSTRC questionnaire is administered every Sunday. Baseline 1, is the measurements collected at inclusion. Baseline 2, 8 weeks follow-up and End of follow-up is the follow-up measurements

References

    1. Van Bottenberg BM, Scheerder J, Hover P. Don’ t miss the next boat : Europe’s opportunities and challenges in the second wave of running. New Stud Athl. 2010;(3):125–43.
    1. Physical T, Council A. 2016 Participation Report The Physical Activity Council’ s annual study. 2016. [Online]. Available: . Accessed 21 Apr 2016.
    1. Brown WJ, Burton NW, Sahlqvist S, Heesch KC, McCarthy KB, Ng N, van Uffelen JGZ. Physical activity in three regional communities in Queensland. Aust J Rural Health. 2013;21:112–120. doi: 10.1111/ajr.12015.
    1. Breuer C, Hallmann K, Wicker P. Determinants of sport participation in different sports. Manag Leis. 2011;16(4):269–86. doi: 10.1080/13606719.2011.613625.
    1. Laub TB. Sports participation in Denmark 2011. Danish Institute for Sports Studies; 2011.
    1. Lee D-CC, Pate RR, Lavie CJ, Sui X, Church TS, Blair SN. Leisure-time running reduces all-cause and cardiovascular mortality risk. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64(5):472–481. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2014.04.058.
    1. Koplan JP, Powell KE, Sikes RK, Shirley RW, Campbell CC. An epidemiologic study of the benefits and risks of running. Jama. 1982;248(23):3118–3121. doi: 10.1001/jama.1982.03330230030026.
    1. Hespanhol Jr LC, Pillay JD, van Mechelen W, Verhagen E, Meta-Analyses of the Effects of Habitual Running on Indices of Health in Physically Inactive Adults. Sport Med. 2015;45(10):1455–68.
    1. Videbæk S, Bueno AM, Nielsen RO, Rasmussen S. Incidence of running-related injuries Per 1000 h of running in different types of runners: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Med. 2015;45(7):1017–1026. doi: 10.1007/s40279-015-0333-8.
    1. Nielsen RO, Rønnow L, Rasmussen S, Lind M. A prospective study on time to recovery in 254 injured novice runners. PLoS One. 2014;9(6):e99877. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0099877.
    1. Van Gent RN, Siem D, Van Middelkoop M, Van Os AG, Bierma Zeinstra SMA, Koes BW. Incidence and determinants of lower extremity running injuries in long distance runners: a systematic review. Br J Sports Med. 2007;41(8):469–480. doi: 10.1136/bjsm.2006.033548.
    1. Taunton JE, Ryan MB, Clement DB, McKenzie DC, Lloyd-Smith DR, Zumbo BD. A prospective study of running injuries: the Vancouver Sun Run ‘In Training’ clinics. Br J Sports Med. 2003;37(3):239–244. doi: 10.1136/bjsm.37.3.239.
    1. Taunton JE, Ryan MB, Clement DB, McKenzie DC, Lloyd-Smith DR, Zumbo BD. A retrospective case–control analysis of 2002 running injuries. Br J Sports Med. 2002;36(2):95–101. doi: 10.1136/bjsm.36.2.95.
    1. Malisoux L, Nielsen RO, Urhausen A, Theisen D. A step towards understanding the mechanisms of running-related injuries. J Sci Med Sport. 2014.
    1. Nielsen RO, Buist I, Sørensen H, Lind M, Rasmussen S. Training errors and running related injuries: a systematic review. Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2012;7(1):58–75.
    1. Buist I, Bredeweg SW, Lemmink KAPM, Pepping GJ, Zwerver J, Van Mechelen W, Diercks RL. The GRONORUN study: is a graded training program for novice runners effective in preventing running related injuries? design of a randomized controlled trial. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2007;8:24. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-8-24.
    1. Bredeweg SW, Zijlstra S, Buist I. The GRONORUN 2 study: effectiveness of a preconditioning program on preventing running related injuries in novice runners. The design of a randomized controlled trial. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2010;11:196. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-11-196.
    1. Pollock ML, Gettman LR, Milesis CA, Bah MD, Durstine L, Johnson RB. Effects of frequency and duration of training on attrition and incidence of injury. Med Sci Sports. 1977;9(1):31–36.
    1. Buist I, Bredeweg SW, van Mechelen W, Lemmink KAPM, Pepping G-J, Diercks RL. No effect of a graded training program on the number of running-related injuries in novice runners: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Sports Med. 2008;36(1):33–39. doi: 10.1177/0363546507307505.
    1. Bredeweg SW, Zijlstra S, Bessem B, Buist I. The effectiveness of a preconditioning programme on preventing running-related injuries in novice runners: a randomised controlled trial. Br J Sports Med. 2012;46:865–870. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2012-091397.
    1. Nielsen RO, Nohr EA, Rasmussen S, Sørensen H. Classifying running-related injuries based upon etiology, with emphasis on volume and pace. Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2013;8(2):172–179.
    1. Petersen J, Nielsen ROR, Rasmussen S, Sørensen H. Comparisons of increases in knee and ankle joint moments following an increase in running speed from 8 to 12 to 16 kilometers per hour. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2014;29(9):959–964. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2014.09.003.
    1. Petersen J, Sørensen H, Nielsen RO, The Cumulative Loads Increase in the Knee Joint at Slow-Speed Running Compared With Faster Running: A Biomechanical Study. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2015;45(4):316-22.
    1. Nielsen RO, Parner ET, Nohr EA, Sørensen H, Lind M, Rasmussen S, Excessive Progression in Weekly Running Distance and Risk of Running-related Injuries: An Association Modified by Type of Injury. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2014;44(10):739–47.
    1. Clarsen B, Myklebust G, Bahr R. Development and validation of a new method for the registration of overuse injuries in sports injury epidemiology: the Oslo Sports Trauma Research Centre (OSTRC) overuse injury questionnaire. Br J Sports Med. 2013;47(8):495–502. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2012-091524.
    1. “RUNSAFE homepage.” [Online]. Available: . Accessed 29 April 2016
    1. Balady GJ, Chaitman B, Driscoll D, Foster C, Froelicher E, Pate R, Rippe J, Bazzarre T. American college of sports medicine position stand and american heart association. Recommendations for cardiovascular screening, staffing, and emergency policies at health/fitness facilities. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1998;30(6):1009–1018.
    1. Wendel-Vos G. Reproducibility and relative validity of the short questionnaire to assess health-enhancing physical activity. J Clin Epidemiol. 2003;56(12):1163–1169. doi: 10.1016/S0895-4356(03)00220-8.
    1. Bompa TO. Periodization - Theory and Methodology of Training, 4th ed. Leeds: Human Kinetics Publishers; 1999.
    1. Seiler S. What is best practice for training intensity and duration distribution in endurance athletes? Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2010;5(3):276–291. doi: 10.1123/ijspp.5.3.276.
    1. J. Daniels, Jack. Gilbert, Oxygen power, 1st ed. Cortland: 90 N main st, Cortland, NY 13045, 1979.
    1. Daniels J. Daniels’ Running Formula, 2nd ed. Leeds: Human Kinetics Publishers; 2005.
    1. Clarsen B, Rønsen O, Myklebust G, Flørenes TW, Bahr R. The oslo sports trauma research center questionnaire on health problems: a new approach to prospective monitoring of illness and injury in elite athletes. Br J Sports Med. 2014;48(9):754–760. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2012-092087.
    1. Nielsen RO, Buist I, Parner ET, Nohr EA, Sorensen H, Lind M, Rasmussen S. Predictors of running-related injuries among 930 novice runners: a 1-year prospective follow-up study. Orthop J Sport Med. 2013;1(1):2325967113487316.
    1. Lun V, Meeuwisse WH, Stergiou P, Stefanyshyn D. Relation between running injury and static lower limb alignment in recreational runners. Br J Sports Med. 2004;38(5):576–580. doi: 10.1136/bjsm.2003.005488.
    1. Greenland S. An introduction to instrumental variables for epidemiologists. Int J Epidemiol. 2000;29(4):722–729. doi: 10.1093/ije/29.4.722.
    1. Parner ET, Andersen PK. Regression analysis of censored data using pseudo-observations. Stata J. 2010;10(3):408–422.
    1. Putter H, Fiocco M, Geskus RB. “Tutorial in biostatistics: Competing risks and multi-state models”, no. October. 2007;2005:2389–2430.
    1. Knol MJ, VanderWeele TJ. Recommendations for presenting analyses of effect modification and interaction. Int J Epidemiol. 2012;41(2):514–520. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyr218.
    1. Hansen SN, Andersen PK, Parner ET. Events per variable for risk differences and relative risks using pseudo-observations. Lifetime Data Anal. 2014;20(4):584–598. doi: 10.1007/s10985-013-9290-4.
    1. T. & F. USA, “USA Track & Field. Long distance Running State of the Sport.” [Online]. Available: . Accessed 29 April 2016.
    1. Knechtle B, Barandun U, Knechtle P, Zingg MA, Rosemann T, Rüst A. Prediction of half-marathon race time in recreational female and male runners. Springerplus. 2014;3:248.
    1. Hespanhol Junior LC, Pena Costa LO, Lopes AD. Previous injuries and some training characteristics predict running-related injuries in recreational runners: A prospective cohort study. J Geophys Res. 2013;59:263–269.
    1. P. Forsberg, “Danish Institute for Sports Studies.” [Online]. Available: . Accessed 29 April 2016.
    1. “Statistics Denmark.” [Online]. Available: . Accessed 29 April 2016.
    1. Townshend AD, Worringham CJ, Stewart IB. Assessment of speed and position during human locomotion using nondifferential GPS. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2008;40(1):124–132. doi: 10.1249/mss.0b013e3181590bc2.
    1. Nielsen RO, Cederholm P, Buist I, Sørensen H, Lind M, Rasmussen S. Can GPS be used to detect deleterious progression in training volume among runners? J Strength Cond Res. 2013;27(6):1471–1478. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3182711e3c.
    1. Johnston RJ, Watsford ML, Kelly SJ, Pine MJ, Spurrs RW. Validity and interunit reliability of 10 Hz and 15 Hz GPS units for assessing athlete movement demands. J Strength Cond Res. 2014;28(6):1649–1655. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000000323.
    1. Vickery WM, Dascombe BJ, Baker JD, Higham DG, Spratford WA, Duffield R. Accuracy and reliability of GPS devices for measurement of sports-specific movement patterns related to cricket, tennis, and field-based team sports. J Strength Cond Res. 2014;28:1697–1705. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000000285.
    1. Witte TH, Wilson AM. Accuracy of non-differential GPS for the determination of speed over ground. J Biomech. 2004;37:1891–1898. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2004.02.031.
    1. Arensman I. Test af Garmin Forerunner (Testing the Garmin Forerunner) Denmark: Aalborg University; 2010.
    1. Ramskov D, Sørensen H, Parner E, Nielsen R, Lind M, Rasmussen S. The run clever study protocol: the design of a randomized controlled trial. Br J Sports Med. 2014;48(7):653. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2014-093494.249.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorzy i współpracownicy

Warunki medyczne

Interwencje lekowe

3
Subskrybuj