Competitive influences of running applications on training habits

ABSTRACT

The use of running applications (RAs) has recently been shown to neither increase nor decrease the risk of running-related injuries (RRIs). However, it is important to note that the study reporting these findings did not account for the influence of virtual competition or challenges, such as virtual leaderboards for certain popular “segments” and monthly “challenges” which reward users for completing predefined tasks in a given time period. Both of these factors may affect the training behaviors of RA users, and indeed may contribute to the risk of RRIs. In particular, the latter may mimic a predefined running scheme, which had a positive relationship with RRIs. Therefore, it is important for future studies to elucidate whether virtual competitions or challenges promoted by RAs influence running behavior, and consequently, the risk for RRIs.

KEYWORDS:

• Injury prevention
• training
• coaching
• fitness app
• exercise

To the editor-in-chief

The recent article by Kemler et al. [1] describing the relationship between the use of running applications (RAs) and running-related injuries (RRIs) raises several important considerations regarding the use of RAs by runners. Oftentimes, these runners are not participating under the direct supervision of a coach and/or support staff, such as athletic trainers or physical therapists, who could otherwise monitor and adjust the training prescription to minimize the risk of RRIs. The authors have provided novel data describing the relationship between the use of an RA and incidence of RRIs, which indicate that the use of RA is not associated with either an increase or decrease in the risk of RRIs. The authors did find however, that the use of predefined running schemes was positively related with RRI. It is possible the predefined running schemes adopted by runners in their study were inappropriate due to mismatches between the scheme and the training or skill level of the runner, suggesting that care should be taken by runners who adopt the use of a predefined running scheme. The adoption of a predefined running scheme that exceeds the capabilities of a runner would clearly increase the risk of sustaining an RRI, particularly overuse injuries. This is particularly true for runners who adopt a predefined scheme, but do not adjust their training load in accordance with their pain and fatigue levels.

While these findings are novel, they did not account for the influence of virtual competition or challenges, such as virtual leaderboards for certain popular “segments” and monthly “challenges” which reward users for completing predefined tasks in a given time period. Both factors may affect the training behaviors of RA users, and indeed may contribute to the risk of RRIs. Certain RAs, such as the social media-like platform Strava [2] which features both competition and challenges, may influence the running habits of subjects who use such apps. The use of fitness-tracking apps may provide health benefits and facilitate coaching among an active segment of the population [3–5], as well as provide a novel data source for research purposes [6]. Apps such as Strava which allow for virtual competition between users, commonly in the form of leaderboards for popular running or cycling segments, may also promote risk-taking behavior [7], thus promoting the risk of injury. In particular, Strava encourages such competition, with purported benefits such as “competitive motivation” and challenges to “encourage users to push harder when exercising alone” [2]. While this type of congenial virtual competition certainly encourages users to perform at their best, and provides a social aspect to what may otherwise be largely individualistic activity, there are associated risks with untrained or under-trained participants over-exerting themselves in order to climb a virtual leaderboard, or otherwise demonstrate their running prowess to their social network. This influence of virtual competition on the running habits of participants should not be discounted. Indeed, this factor was not accounted for in the analysis by Kemler et al. [1], but could have influenced their findings. It is suggested that a future study include questions probing whether the use of a RA, and in particular an RA which encourages virtual competition, influences the running habits of participants. Subsequent comparison of RRI incidence between respondents who answer “yes” and “no” could provide insight into whether the competitive influence of these RAs could affect RRI incidence.

Separately, it is noted that among some apps, “challenges” are issued to participants to complete a predefined volume of activity during a set time period (for example, Strava has a current challenge for users to run 200 km in the month of January 2018 to earn a “badge” for their “Trophy Case,” which can be found online at Strava [8]). This type of “challenge” may act in a similar fashion to a predefined running scheme, and may push users to 1) increase their training volume either at a faster rate than safely recommended, 2) to a total volume that is higher than what would be recommended for their training purposes and fitness level, or both. Therefore, this could increase the incidence of RRIs if participants alter their training habits in an unsafe manner in an attempt to meet such challenges.

Participating in virtual competitions and challenges through RAs can certainly encourage users to push themselves, and these activities also add a social and entertainment aspect to physical activity. However, it is prudent for participants to recognize behaviors that could put them at risk for RRIs, and to avoid participation in such virtual competitions and challenges if doing so would substantially increase their risk for RRIs. Consultation with a knowledgeable and experienced coach and medical professional should be encouraged prior to such participation as well. RAs and other fitness-tracking apps can encourage the adoption and practice of activities to promote health and fitness, but their use should be balanced with the added risk of injury that comes with increases in physical activity, and in particular, with running. Nevertheless, the findings of Kemler et al. [1] are an encouraging step toward demonstrating the safety of RAs. The authors are applauded for their novel research, and encouraged to pursue additional studies further elucidating the relationship between RAs and RRIs, and in particular whether the competitive influence of some RAs contribute to the incidence of RRIs.

Declaration of interest

None reported. CMRO reviewers on this manuscript have no relevant financial or other relationships to disclose.

Acknowledgments

None reported.

Additional information

Funding

R-J.S. is supported by 5T32HL105346-08 from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH).