Volume 10, Issue 3 (11-2024)                   J Sport Biomech 2024, 10(3): 242-252 | Back to browse issues page


XML Persian Abstract Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Hajilou B, Azadian E, Sadeghi S, Mohammadi Sasan R. Evaluation of the Effect of Five-Finger Shoes on Calf Muscle Electromyography Activity in Novice Runners. J Sport Biomech 2024; 10 (3) :242-252
URL: http://biomechanics.iauh.ac.ir/article-1-351-en.html
1- Department of Sensorimotor Disabilities, Research Institute of Exceptional Children, Research Institute for Education, Organization for Educational Research and Planning, Tehran, Iran.
2- Department of Motor Behavior, Hamedan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Hamedan, Iran.
3- Department of Motor Behavior, Faculty of Sports Sciences, Bu-Ali Sina University, Hamedan, Iran.
4- Department of Sport Injury and Corrective Exercise, Faculty of Humanities, University College of Omran_Toseeh, Hamedan, Iran.
Full-Text [PDF 1663 kb]   (203 Downloads)     |   Abstract (HTML)  (653 Views)
Full-Text:   (284 Views)
Extended Abstract
1.    Introduction
The foot plays a critical role in absorbing impact, maintaining dynamic and static balance, and transmitting propulsion forces during running. Running footwear design influences foot biomechanics and muscle activation, which can affect performance and injury risk. The five-finger shoe, categorized as a minimalist shoe, mimics barefoot conditions while providing slight protection and structure. Although studies have examined the effects of minimalist shoes on muscle activity and running biomechanics, findings are varied regarding its advantages and potential limitations. Given the need to evaluate the five-finger shoe’s influence on ankle-related muscle activation, this study investigates the electromyographic (EMG) activity in specific lower leg muscles during running in barefoot and five-finger shoe conditions among novice runners.
2.    Methods
This semi-experimental study involved 16 novice male runners aged 20–30 years. Inclusion criteria required a minimum of one year of running experience and no previous use of five-finger shoes. Exclusion criteria included unwillingness to continue participation, discomfort or pain during testing, or recent musculoskeletal or neurological injuries. After obtaining informed consent, participants’ personal information was recorded, and muscle activity data were collected using an 8-channel MegaWin electromyography (EMG) device. Electrodes were placed on the dominant leg’s medial gastrocnemius, lateral gastrocnemius, soleus, and tibialis anterior muscles following the SENIAM protocol. Two foot switches were installed on each participant’s foot to mark the stance and propulsion phases. Participants completed 20-meter runs at a controlled speed of 3 meters per second in both barefoot and five-finger shoe conditions. Each condition was randomly assigned, and data were collected in three trials for each condition. EMG signals were normalized to maximum voluntary isometric contractions (MVICs) and analyzed using a paired t-test to assess differences between conditions with significance set at p < 0.05.
3.    Results
Table 1 presents the EMG activity comparisons for the selected muscles between barefoot and five-finger shoe conditions. Notably, the tibialis anterior muscle showed significantly higher activation during the contact phase when running with five-finger shoes compared to barefoot (p = 0.001). Similarly, the soleus and medial gastrocnemius muscles exhibited increased activation during the propulsion phase in the five-finger shoe condition (p = 0.002 and p = 0.010, respectively). However, lateral gastrocnemius activity did not differ significantly between conditions (p > 0.05).

4.    Conclusion
This study demonstrated that five-finger shoes increased muscle activity in specific calf muscles during running. Higher tibialis anterior activation in the contact phase suggests an adaptation to the altered foot strike pattern, likely related to heel impact when wearing five-finger shoes. Lieberman et al. (2010) found that barefoot running encourages mid- or forefoot strikes, reducing dorsiflexion and tibialis anterior activity, while minimalist footwear like five-finger shoes allows slight heel strikes, necessitating greater tibialis anterior engagement. Increased soleus and medial gastrocnemius activation in the propulsion phase suggests that five-finger shoes may elicit a foot-strike pattern with greater ground contact duration, engaging calf muscles for enhanced propulsion and support.
Additionally, adaptation to new footwear can impact muscle activation as runners adjust to its unique structure and feel. Warne and Gruber (2017) highlighted that transitioning to minimalist footwear requires neuromuscular adaptation, potentially increasing muscle activity initially. Over time, this adaptation may strengthen lower leg muscles, leading to more efficient running mechanics. Future research should investigate long-term adaptations to five-finger shoes and their impact on muscle activation and running performance. This study’s findings suggest that five-finger shoes may be beneficial for novice runners, offering a muscle activation pattern closer to barefoot running but with added protection. This information can guide sports trainers, therapists, and footwear designers in developing training programs and footwear that enhance performance and reduce injury risk. The findings indicate that five-finger shoes elicit similar muscle activity to barefoot running, with notable increases in tibialis anterior, soleus, and medial gastrocnemius activation. This suggests five-finger shoes could be a viable option for novice runners, potentially aiding in muscle strengthening while providing foot protection. Further studies are recommended to explore long-term adaptations and injury prevention benefits associated with these shoes.
Ethical Considerations
Compliance with ethical guidelines

There were no ethical considerations to be addressed in this research.
Funding
This research did not receive any financial support from government, private, or non-profit organizations.
Authors' contributions
All authors contributed equally to preparing the article.
Conflicts of interest
The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest associated with this article.
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Special
Received: 2024/11/14 | Accepted: 2025/01/5 | Published: 2025/01/7

References
1. Kelly LA, Lichtwark GA, Farris DJ, Cresswell A. Shoes alter the spring-like function of the human foot during running. Journal of The Royal Society Interface. 2016;13(119):20160174. [DOI:10.1098/rsif.2016.0174] [PMID]
2. Hirschmüller A, Baur H, Müller S, Helwig P, Dickhuth H-H, Mayer F. Clinical effectiveness of customised sport shoe orthoses for overuse injuries in runners: a randomised controlled study. British Journal of Sports Medicine. 2011;45(12):959-65. [DOI:10.1136/bjsm.2008.055830] [PMID]
3. García-Arrabé M, García-Fernandez P, Díaz-Arribas MJ, López-Marcos JJ, González-de-la-Flor Á, Estrada-Barranco C, et al. Electromyographic activity of the pelvic floor muscles and internal oblique muscles in women during running with traditional and minimalist shoes: a cross-over clinical trial. Sensors. 2023;23(14):6496. [DOI:10.3390/s23146496] [PMID]
4. Azevedo APdS, Mezêncio B, Amadio AC, Serrao JC. 16 weeks of progressive barefoot running training changes impact force and muscle activation in habitual shod runners. PloS one. 2016;11(12):e0167234. [DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0167234] [PMID]
5. Gillinov SM, Laux S, Kuivila T, Hass D, Joy SM. Effect of minimalist footwear on running efficiency: A randomized crossover trial. Sports health. 2015;7(3):256-60. [DOI:10.1177/1941738115571093] [PMID]
6. Davis IS, Rice HM, Wearing SC. Why forefoot striking in minimal shoes might positively change the course of running injuries. Journal of sport and health science. 2017;6(2):154-61. [DOI:10.1016/j.jshs.2017.03.013] [PMID]
7. Davis IS. The re-emergence of the minimal running shoe. journal of orthopaedic & sports physical therapy. 2014;44(10):775-84. [DOI:10.2519/jospt.2014.5521] [PMID]
8. Campitelli NA, Spencer SA, Bernhard K, Heard K, Kidon A. Effect of Vibram FiveFingers minimalist shoes on the abductor hallucis muscle. Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association. 2016;106(5):344-51. [DOI:10.7547/14-084] [PMID]
9. Hoseini SZ, Eslami M. Effect of Five-Finger Shoes on Vertical Ground Reaction Force Loading Rates and Perceived Comfort during the Stance Phase of the Running. Journal of Sport Biomechanics. 2016;2(1):37-47.
10. Hannigan J, Pollard CD. Differences in running biomechanics between a maximal, traditional, and minimal running shoe. Journal of science and medicine in sport. 2020;23(1):15-9. [DOI:10.1016/j.jsams.2019.08.008] [PMID]
11. Becker J, Borgia B. Kinematics and muscle activity when running in partial minimalist, traditional, and maximalist shoes. Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology. 2020;50:102379. [DOI:10.1016/j.jelekin.2019.102379] [PMID]
12. Burden S, Maulder P. A biomechanical comparison of the foot strike between running in Vibram Fivefingers® shoes and barefoot/Leah Hutching: Wintec, Hamilton, New Zealand; 2013.
13. Smith BS, Burton B, Johnson D, Kendrick S, Meyer E, Yuan W. Effects of wearing athletic shoes, five‐toed shoes, and standing barefoot on balance performance in young adults. International journal of sports physical therapy. 2015;10(1):69.
14. Sinclair J, Hobbs S, Currigan G, Taylor P. A comparison of several barefoot inspired footwear models in relation to barefoot and conventional running footwear. Comparative Exercise Physiology. 2013;9(1):13-21. [DOI:10.3920/CEP13004]
15. Hajiloo B, Anbarian M, Esmaeili H, Mirzapour M. The effects of fatigue on synergy of selected lower limb muscles during running. Journal of Biomechanics. 2020;103:109692. [DOI:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2020.109692] [PMID]
16. Sepehrian M, Anbarian M, Khotanlou H, Hajilou B. Effects of Cycling-induced Fatigue on Lower Extremity Muscles Synergy in Novice Triathletes. Journal of Advanced Sport Technology. 2022;6(1):103-12.
17. Stegeman D, Hermens H. Standards for surface electromyography: The European project Surface EMG for non-invasive assessment of muscles (SENIAM). Enschede: Roessingh Research and Development. 2007;10:8-12.
18. Schorderet C, Hilfiker R, Allet L. The role of the dominant leg while assessing balance performance. A systematic review and meta-analysis. Gait & posture. 2021;84:66-78. [DOI:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2020.11.008] [PMID]
19. Alvim F, Cerqueira L, Netto ADA, Leite G, Muniz A. Comparison of five kinematic-based identification methods of foot contact events during treadmill walking and running at different speeds. Journal of applied biomechanics. 2015;31(5):383-8. [DOI:10.1123/jab.2014-0178] [PMID]
20. Winter D. Human balance and posture control during standing and walking. J Neurophysiol. 1998;80:1211. [DOI:10.1152/jn.1998.80.3.1211] [PMID]
21. Beierle R, Burton P, Smith H, Smith M, Ives SJ. The effect of barefoot running on EMG activity in the gastrocnemius and tibialis anterior in active college-aged females. International journal of exercise science. 2019;12(1):1110. [DOI:10.70252/LNVL7215] [PMID]
22. Lieberman DE, Venkadesan M, Werbel WA, Daoud AI, D'andrea S, Davis IS, et al. Foot strike patterns and collision forces in habitually barefoot versus shod runners. Nature. 2010;463(7280):531-5. [DOI:10.1038/nature08723] [PMID]
23. Divert C, Mornieux G, Freychat P, Baly L, Mayer F, Belli A. Barefoot-shod running differences: shoe or mass effect? International journal of sports medicine. 2008;29(06):512-8. [DOI:10.1055/s-2007-989233] [PMID]
24. Warne JP, Gruber AH. Transitioning to minimal footwear: a systematic review of methods and future clinical recommendations. Sports medicine-open. 2017;3:1-21. [DOI:10.1186/s40798-017-0096-x] [PMID]
25. Squadrone R, Gallozzi C. Biomechanical and physiological comparison of barefoot and two shod conditions in experienced barefoot runners. Journal of sports medicine and physical fitness. 2009;49(1):6.
26. Hoitz F, Vienneau J, Nigg BM. Influence of running shoes on muscle activity. PloS one. 2020;15(10):e0239852. [DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0239852] [PMID]
27. Johnson A, Myrer J, Mitchell U, Hunter I, Ridge S. The effects of a transition to minimalist shoe running on intrinsic foot muscle size. International journal of sports medicine. 2016;37(02):154-8. [DOI:10.1055/s-0036-1585483]

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2025 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Journal of Sport Biomechanics

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb