Alternative upper configurations during agility-based movements: part 2, joint-level biomechanics

Abstract

Alternative shoe fit configurations can improve agility performance, however the joint level biomechanical changes that contribute to enhanced performance are unknown. The purpose of this study was to assess differences in joint-level biomechanics related to jumping and cutting performance and potential injury risk mechanisms, between different shoe upper configurations. NCAA Division 1 and club-level male athletes (n = 31) recruited from lacrosse, soccer, tennis, and rugby performed four agility-based movements: Lateral Skater Jump Repeats (LSJ), Countermovement Jump Repeats (CMJ), Triangle Drop Step Drill (TDS), and Anterior-Posterior Drill (AP). Each athlete performed the movements in four shoe upper closures: Standard Closure, Lace Replacement, Y Wrap, and Tri Panel. Ankle, knee and hip range of motion and peak joint moments in the sagittal, frontal and transverse planes, as well as peak joint powers, were calculated for CMJ and LSJ movements. Alternative fit configurations led to increased ankle plantarflexion and knee extension joint moments. Further, frontal and transverse plane ranges of motion at the ankle, knee and hip were reduced with at least one alternative fit configuration. These findings help to explain improved agility performance with upper configurations designed to better fit the shape of the foot and suggest improved lower limb alignment which may help to prevent musculoskeletal injury.

Keywords:

• Shoe closure
• shoe design
• shoe upper
• athletic shoe
• joint moment
• range of motion

Disclosure statement

BD, KS, and JD were employed by Boa Technology as scientific consultants prior to conducting the research project presented in the manuscript. MP, RW, NN, KS, and BD are employed by the University of Denver, and received compensation for conducting the research. JD is employed by REP Lab, and did not receive any compensation for conducting the research. DF and KH are employed as biomechanical engineers at Boa Technology.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by BOA Technology, Inc.