This is the second in a series of RunSmart videos. The series is on-going, with a new video released on a monthly basis. These videos complement the material presented in the book “RunSmart: A Comprehensive Approach To Injury-Free Running”. The full series of videos can be found here. A transcription of the video will also be available with each post.
For those of you that are interested in a more interactive learning environment, consider attending a four hour RunSmart Level One program. You can further your education with the Level Two and Level Three programs which will focus on the application of RunSmart principles to both coaching and training program development and running injury recovery.
In this video, I will discuss the concept of changing your running form. Should you do so? And why?
I hope you enjoy the video series. If you would like me to address any specific aspect of the RunSmart approach, drop me an email or add a comment to this article.
Evidence-based clinical practice consists of the use of assessment strategies and treatment interventions that have scientific evidence to support their use. The harsh reality is that although there are a myriad of hypothetical constructs underlying many assessment strategies and treatment interventions, many (if not most) of these are not yet supported by both the physiology literature (on the cellular level) and the clinical literature (on the applied level).
On a daily basis, clinicians are faced with a significant clinical and ethical decision: to utilize evidence-based clinical approaches, or not. Is non-evidence-based practice not only a clinical issue, but a broader ethical issue as well?
We are the masters of our own destiny. And we oftentimes forget it. You hear it all the time in our daily dialogue, the words we choose when we speak about our world:
I am fat. I am slow. I am dumb. I am unlovable. I can’t learn this.
Worse yet, how about the unspoken dialogue that exists when you read between the lines:
I am a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Are we passive victims of our own physical and mental worlds? Must we be transfixed on a life of woe ahead of us? The answer is simple: No.
We can choose to Live A Smart Life, or we can choose to do nothing, or any of a number of options in between. We can choose to remodel our world – and here’s how.
In a previous post, I described the basic principles underlying Recovery-Centered Training (RCT). This new model of human performance is based on the mechanisms of tissue recovery, adaptation, and development. Not only does it focus on optimizing the sport performance capacity of the athlete, but it also serves as a functional basis for injury prevention-based training. A schematic overview can be found below.
One of the primary functional elements of Recovery-Centered Training is the mechanical network. This includes all of the tissues and the neuro-musculo-skeletal and cardiovascular systems. In many ways, the cardiovascular system is simply another component of the neuro-musculo-skeletal system. The heart is, in fact, a very specialized muscle that adapts to training stimuli much like other skeletal muscles do. These systems (and the tissues that create these systems) are responsible for the mechanical function of the human body.
In a previous post, I discussed the use of the term “voodoo” by Dr. James Irrgang in a NY Times article on physical therapy last year. As I mentioned, the reason why this article suddenly became relevant was the sad realization that not much has changed in the profession in the 18 months that followed the article’s publication.
Frankly, I applaud Dr. Irrgang in presenting the NY Times with the current clinical reality of physical therapy. But there was a significant backlash by many physical therapists, including Irrgang’s peers in the American Physical Therapy Association, for his use of the word “voodoo”.
My biggest concern is that if there was a problem with the use of the term, then there is an even bigger issue with the middle-of-the-road response from my peers and my professional association.
It is a strange health irony that we face.
The costs of obesity are staggering. In order to decrease both the short-term and long-term costs, we need to get people moving. But as we get more people moving, how many get injured along the way?
In a health care system that has tremendous levels of over-utilization, are we truly saving any money if people end up injured in the process?
I am not saying that we need to live in fear of injury and stay obese. What I am saying is that simply “getting active” can be a significant risk factor – and if you do get injured, the health care “system” will probably over-treat you. If we can prevent injuries while losing weight, we end up with huge cost savings. If we have an increase in injuries while attempting to lose weight, the long-term costs may actually rise.
Let’s take a look at how the process typically works. If you are overweight, which represents a significant percentage of the US population, you might decide that you need to lose some weight. You might decide that you need to change your lifestyle. You might even decide to understand the reasons why you eat and address them accordingly. Great stuff!
The hard part is over … or is it?
Every athlete wants to improve. That is a simple fact. Most athletes will opt for the “more is better” approach. But if you move poorly in space and have lousy mechanics, then “more” just reinforces the bad.
As a coach, I will always opt for the “more better is better” approach. Good quality training involves working on technique. My goal is to make each and every athlete move better in space - which always involves working on the technical aspects of their sport training.
All motor programs for sport activities are under volitional control. Motor programs can thus be improved with training! But to do so, we have to keep in mind that the primary limiter when learning a new sport activity (or component of it) is neuromuscular fatigue. For example, when doing swim drills, there is a point of diminishing returns in which “doing more” will only reinforce bad movement patterns. From a neurological (central nervous system) perspective, the goal must always be one of quality, maintaining the goal movement pattern, and then stopping when neuromuscular fatigue sets in.
Oftentimes a key word or mental cue can be a starting point to improving an athlete’s sport biomechanics. Here are a list of 17 mental cues that can be used to improve your sport technique for each of the three triathlon disciplines.
Allan Besselink, PT, DPT, Ph.D., Dip.MDT has a unique voice in the world of sports, education, and health care. Read more about Allan here.