4.1 Article

High Number of Daily Steps Recorded by Runners Recovering from Bone Stress Injuries

Journal

HSS JOURNAL
Volume 16, Issue 2_SUPPL, Pages 408-411

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1007/s11420-020-09787-z

Keywords

bone stress injury; running; physical activity; activity monitor

Funding

  1. American Society for Sports Medicine (AMSSM) Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Bone stress injuries (BSIs) are common among runners for which activity modification is the primary treatment. The clinical utility of measuring activity during recovery has not been evaluated. Questions/Purposes We sought to measure the physical activity of runners recovering from BSIs and determine if activity can be correlated with symptoms. Methods A prospective observational pilot study was performed of runners with a new lower extremity BSI treated non-surgically. For 30 days, activity of runners was measured with a physical activity tracker and daily pain scores were collected. Results We enrolled 18 runners (average age, 33 years; 72% female). Twelve had stress fractures and six had stress reactions. The average daily steps of all runners during the observation period was 10,018 +/- 3232, and the runner with the highest daily steps averaged 15,976. There were similar average daily steps in those with stress fractures versus reactions, 10,329 versus 9965, respectively. There was no correlation between daily steps or relative change in daily steps with pain or relative change in pain scores. Conclusion Runners with BSIs averaged over 10,000 steps per day during early recovery. Clinicians may not be aware of the amount of activity runners maintain after being diagnosed with a BSI. Although daily steps and symptoms could not be correlated in this study, objectively measuring activity may assist clinicians in guiding runners recovering from BSIs.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available