Upload
petegilpin
View
218
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
1/44
1006877BSc (Hons) Applied Sport and Exercise Science
Assessment Submission
I certify that I have complied with the following statements:
Pleaseinitialthe
boxes
1.
All material in this assessment is my own work and that which is not myown work has been identified. PG
2. Any names and locations that would allow clients to be identified havebeen changed to protect confidentiality of information. PG
3. I have read the University Academic Regulations relating to StudentDisciplines and Academic Misconduct, which are available on theUniversitys web site. I understand that I am bound by such policy andthat I may be subject to student disciplinary processes in the event ofan act of plagiarism, collusion or impersonation by me.
PG
4. I have read the assessment guidance in full including the proformasused for grading (i.e. assessment brief /grid /MPD). PG
5. I have attended any relevant assessment tutorials (group and /orindividual) and clarified any queries I have with regard to theassessment criteria prior to submission.
PG
6. Whilst preparing this assessment submission, I have taken into accountthe feedback comments that I have received on previous assessmentsubmissions.
PG
7. I have fully proof read or sought help with proofreading all work prior tosubmission for grammar, spelling and structure; I have prepared mywork as per the instructions in the brief and the School of HealthSciences Style Manual.
PG
8.
By submitting this assessment, I know of no reason (medical orotherwise) that has negatively impacted upon my ability to complete it.If I know of anything that has negatively impacted upon my ability, Ihave completed an extenuating circumstances form and submitted italong with the accompanying evidence to my course leader.
PG
Module number: HS4101Research title: Do FitflopstmIncrease Energy Expenditure In Women
During 3 Simulated Activities Of Daily Living?Research Supervisor: Dr Katherine BurgessDate of hand-in: 02 May 2014Student number: 1006877Word count: 8500 (ex citations (618)
TurnItIn checked: Yes
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
2/44
1006877
"
DO FITFLOPSTMINCREASE ENERGY
EXPENDITURE IN WOMEN DURING
3 SIMULATED ACTIVITIES OF DAILYLIVING?
Pete Gilpin
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
3/44
1006877
#
Contents:
Acknowledgements 3
Abstract 4
Introduction 5
Project Aims 14
Methodology 15
Results 21
Discussion 24
Conclusion 30
References 32
Appendices 42
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
4/44
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
5/44
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
6/44
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
7/44
1006877
'
MBTTM, Sketchers Shape-upTMand Stretch WalkerTMand the variable density sole
used in the FitFlopTMrange and to a lesser extent in the MBTTM. (Appendix 2)
The first unstable shoes were developed under the view that the combination of
contemporary cushioned footwear and the modern built environment has
diminished postural control of the lower limb by the small extrinsic muscles ofthe foot thereby exposing individuals to increased injury risk (Landry et al.
2010). Indeed, Nigg et al. 2005 used a theoretical mechanical model to show
that the smaller muscles of the foot may react faster to perturbations than the
larger muscles, providing support for the hypothesis of training them. However
it is not certain whether these observations would still hold in-vivo. Despite the
numerous studies that have subsequently examined muscle activation and EE in
unstable shoes, the findings have been variable and thus far inconclusive. In
addition, the methodological differences in their approaches have also made
comparisons challenging.
Certainly, the presence of instability and devices such as the wobbleboardTM
designed to induce it, are reported to increase electromyographic (EMG) activity
in both static and dynamic conditions, even in the well resistance trained (Wahl
and Behm 2008; Anderson et al. 2013). Muscle activation is closely associated
with force output (Hof 1984; Alkner et al. 2000), which is in turn associated withmetabolic energy rate (Hawkins and Mol 1997; Umberger et al. 2003). The
entire relationship is a more complex interaction of mechanical and bio-energetic
factors, a full explanation of which is beyond the scope of this paper.
The FitFlopis a thong-style flip-flop produced by the company of the same
name. The footwear features their proprietary microwobbleboardtechnology
which consists of a variable density sole composed of a high-density heel, low
density mid-foot and medium density forefoot (appendix 2). The variable
density sole was originally purported to create instability at the ankle joint that
is overcome through additional muscle recruitment, providing a workout while
you walk (FitFlops Ltd. 2013). Despite claims that the FitFlopTMcan increase
muscle activity, improve posture, redistribute plantar pressure, reduce both back
and joint pain and increase energy expenditure, (FlipFlopsLtd. 2013) few
experimental studies have explored all of these assertions and few firm
conclusions reached.
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
8/44
1006877
(
Only 3 peer-reviewed studies have examined the FitFlopTM. Burgess and
Swinton, 2011 assessed the EMG activity of selected muscles of women walking
in FitFlopsTMand reported no significant increases in normalised rms-EMG
activity of the gluteus maximus (GM), biceps femoris (BF), rectus femoris or
medial gastrocnemius compared to regular thong flip-flops or barefoot walkingacross three simulated daily activities. However, the authors only examined the
larger muscles of the lower extremity and thus increased activation of smaller
leg and extrinsic postural muscles cannot be wholly excluded. Particularly given
the findings of Landry et al. 2010 who reported increased activation of the small
medial flexor digitorum longus, peroneal and anterior compartment muscles but
not the larger soleus. However, the results of Landry et al. were observed in the
MBTs shoes and during quiet standing and whether a similar effect is observed
during walking is unknown. Nevertheless, the magnitude of an increase in EE
arising from the increased activation of only these small muscle groups would
likely be small and questionable in terms of producing a meaningful impact on
energy balance.
Price et al. 2013a compared both EMG and kinematic variables during walking in
the FitFlopTMto other unstable shoes and a control and reported findings
somewhat in support of the non-significant trend toward lower EMG values in theFitFlopTMcompared to a flip-flop reported by Burgess and Swinton, 2011.
Activation of the soleus, medial gastrocnemius and BF were all reduced while in
the FitFlopTMcompared to the flip-flop, however only during mid-stance. The
tibialis anterior (TA) and peroneus longus muscle also showed reduced loading
response in the FitFlopTM. Price et al. 2013b also used a bespoke pressure insole
to examine plantar pressures of the foot during walking and reported that
compared to a Haviana flip-flop, the FitFlopTMsignificantly reduced peak pressure
in the heel (-3.6%) and the pressure time integral at the 1st
metatarsophalangeal joint (-12%), increased total contact area and redistributed
plantar pressure towards the mid-foot. Interestingly however, local plantar
pressure redistribution has been associated with increased shoe comfort (Chen
et al. 1994, Jordan et al. 1997) and increased shoe comfort has in turn been
associated with increased submaximal running economy and reduced oxygen
consumption (VO2) (-7.6%) (Burke and Papuga, 2012). These findings in
aggregate suggest that the acute effect of FitFlopsTMon EE could potentially be
one of reduced EE rather than an increase. Although clearly the exercise
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
9/44
1006877
)
modality in Burke and Papupa, 2012 may have implications with respect to
generalisation to this study.
Given the claims of increased muscle activation made by the manufacturers of
unstable shoes and the similarities to balance training, most studies to datehave focused on the effect of unstable shoes on balance, kinetic, kinematic and
EMG variables during standing and walking. Several studies have demonstrated
a significant effect of rocker soled shoes on both kinematic and temporal-spatial
parameters of gait (Nigg et al. 2006; Boyer and Andriacchi 2009; Demura and
Demura 2012b; Landry et al. 2012; Forghany et al. 2014) and balance (Nigg et
al.2006; Ramstrand et al. 2010; Landry et al. 2010), attributed to the shaped
sole in the anterior-posterior direction. These findings could potentially support
a hypothesis of increased energy expenditure as alterations to an individuals
usual walking mechanics or increased muscle activity arising from the need to
overcome instability could expend more energy. Indeed, clinical studies have
reported that both pathological and imposed alterations to gait pattern increase
the energy cost of walking (Bard 1963; Waters et al. 1982; Waters et al. 1988;
Mattsson and Brostrom 1990; Kerrigan et al. 1995). However, extrapolation of
findings from these studies featuring individuals with neuromuscular or
musculoskeletal conditions might be inappropriate as these individuals maydemonstrate broad variation in, and heterogeneous distribution of, postural and
locomotor muscle activity and therefore limited co-ordination of the various body
segments required for normal gait (Rogers 1996; Vachranukunkiet and
Esquenazi 2013).
While some of the findings from balance studies are relevant in terms of a
clinical outcome, their extrapolation to an energy expenditure hypothesis casts
doubt upon the longitudinal efficacy of unstable shoes in achieving additional
calorie expenditure. Both Ramstrand et al. 2010 and Landry et al. 2010 used
MBTs in 8 and 6-week interventions respectively and reported significant
improvements in balance. If alterations to balance or gait and thus muscle
activity are responsible for increases in EE at baseline, these might be overcome
after a period of acquisition or familiarisation. Research has demonstrated that
novel tasks initially impose a greater energy cost and magnitude of muscle
activation an effect seen to diminish with practice (Lay et al. 2002; Sparrow
and Irizarry-Lopez 1987). It is therefore possible that unstable shoes might
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
10/44
1006877
*+
demonstrate an acute response that is attenuated over time. Indeed, Yap et al.
2013 reported increased EE while wearing unstable shoes during the first 5
minutes of wear, but at the end of a 40 minute familiarisation period EE was not
significantly different to a control shoe, demonstrating a clear learning effect
while in the unstable shoe even over a short period of time.
Additionally Maffiuletti et al. 2012 estimated that the contribution of wearing
MBTTMshoes to increased daily EE approximated only 40 Kcal/day, far short of
the 100Kcal net deficit suggested by Hill et al. 2003 to prevent weight gain and
thus sheds doubt upon their practical application for the purposes of energy
balance manipulation.
Electromyography studies of unstable shoes have been less conclusive in their
findings, owing to methodological differences in both their experimental and
analytical approaches. One of most obvious challenges in reconciling the
findings of all unstable shoe studies relates to different brands of unstable shoes
used in the various studies. There are different design features between
unstable shoe brands that may impact the EMG response observed.
Furthermore, different models of the same brand may elicit differential
magnitudes and directions of physiological responses. As an illustrativeexample, Buchecker et al. 2012 explored the effect of 3 different MBTTMmodels
(JamboTM, TembaTM, MahutaTM) on mean velocity of centre of pressure
displacement and noted increases of 12.5, 17.2 and 21.5% respectively
compared to a control shoe. However, significant increases in muscle activation
of the vastus lateralis was only reported for the TembaTMand MahutaTMand
increased TA, and PL were only reported for the MahutaTMmodel and no
differences for the GM or BF across all shoes. The mixed directional trends
reported by Buchecker et al. underscores the difficulty of making comparisons
between experimental findings. Analytical variability may also be a source of
contrast between study findings. Romkes et al. 2006 reported a significant
effect of unstable shoes on EMG activity of the TA and GM. However the authors
used a peculiar method of partitioning the gait cycle for analysis rather than
using the entire trace, meaning that they could identify points of the stride at
which EMG was increased, differences perhaps not seen using the entire trace.
Romkes et al. also gave instruction on walking in the footwear. It is therefore
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
11/44
1006877
**
unclear whether the new walking pattern or the shoes were truly responsible for
the difference reported.
Unstable shoes have been less well explored within the energy expenditure
domain. As with EMG studies, the findings are inconclusive. Porcari et al. 2011
examined 3 unstable shoes (MBTTM, Sketchers Shape-UpsTM, Reebok EasytoneTM)
reporting no significant increase in EE, VO2or heart rate (HR) compared to a
control. Rating of perceived exertion showed a small but significant increase in
the EasytoneTMmodel but only at the most intense workload (1.56 m/s 5%
gradient). Gjovaag et al. 2011 had more conclusive increases in EE when
examining the effect of wearing the MBTTMduring treadmill walking at 1.6 m/s-1
with a 10% gradient but not during slower flat walking (1.24 m/s). Suggesting
that the effect of unstable shoes in the EE domain may be velocity or workload
dependant. Indeed, Van Engelen et al. 2010; Maffiuletti et al. 2012 and Koyama
et al. 2012 all used imposed walking speeds above 1.24 m/s and reported
increased oxygen consumption during flat walking in unstable shoes.
Importantly, Maffiuletti et als findings were observed in obese women and
research has previously reported reduced balance control in obese individuals
that could potentially exaggerate the physiological effect of the unstable shoe
(Berrigan et al. 2006; Berrigan 2008). Indeed, Browning and Kram, 2005
reported that obese women incur a greater energy cost of walking compared to
healthy controls over speeds of 0.75-1.75 m/s and that the slope of their
workload-oxygen uptake curve is steeper than healthy controls, meaning that
each increase in workload is that much more taxing than for the controls.
A potential confounding variable present in some EE studies is that the mass of
the unstable shoe used has ranged between 36% and 85% greater than the
control shoe (Van Engelen et al. 2010; Gjovaag et al. 2011; Maffiuletti et al.
2012; Koyama et al. 2012; Demura and Demura 2012). It is therefore unclear
whether the increase in EE observed in these studies was due to the shoe design
features or its additional mass. Increasing the mass of footwear is reported to
increase the relative additional mechanical work performed as a function of
maximal foot speed (Nigg et al. 2000). However, both Santos et al. 2012 and
Forghany et al. 2014, controlled for the increased mass of a rocker bottom
versus a regular athletic trainer and reported no significant differences in themetabolic cost of walking on a treadmill at a pace 10% above free walking speed
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
12/44
1006877
*"
or at free walking speed respectively. Additionally, Abe et al. 2004 reported no
significant difference in the oxygen cost of walking with a load applied to each
ankle at any walking speed in the range of 0.66 and 2 m/s between a control
condition and either a 1 and 1.5kg condition. However, other others have
reported findings to the contrary (Frederick et al. 1984).
Another difference that may explain conflicting results within the literature is the
use of self-selected vs imposed walking speeds. Some authors (Gjovaag et al.
2011; Hansen and Wang 2011; Maffiuletti et al. 2012; Forghany et al. 2014; Yap
et al. 2013) have elected to use the natural walking speed of the participants
while others (Van Engelen et al. 2010; Gjovaag et al. 2011 Porcari et al. 2011;
Koyama et al. 2012; Demura and Demura 2012) have imposed a walking speed
pre-selected by the authors. The study by Maffiuletti et al. 2012 is the only
study out of 5 that elected to use a self-selected pace and also reported
increased EE while walking in the unstable shoe. 3 of 5 studies using an
imposed walking speed reported increased oxygen uptake or increased EE while
walking in an unstable shoe. Ralston 1958 first identified the energy-speed
relationship in normal healthy subjects and concluded that the natural walking
speed of an individual reflects the speed that induces the lowest metabolic cost.
This speed was determined to be 1.23 m/s in a group of healthy adult males andfemales, slower than the imposed speeds of the aforementioned studies. Holt et
al. 1995 added to these findings and concluded that in addition to metabolic
cost, stability of the head and joint actions is also optimised at the preferred
walking speed, suggesting the higher speeds induce greater instability in gait. It
has also been shown in a group of healthy students that speeds greater than the
optimum or natural walking speed display less consistency in gait characteristics
(Sekiya et al. 1997). This greater variability in kinematic variables may be
further exaggerated at higher speeds while wearing an unstable shoe, thus
inducing a greater energy cost. Notably, in Sekiya et als study the preferred
speed for women was also 1.230.17 m/s. The greater frequency of significant
differences found in studies using an imposed walking speed may be related to
greater variability of gait and instability during gait of the imposed walking
speed. In contrast, Bertram, 2005 reported that a speed constraint might not
impact metabolic cost as much as step length or frequency constraint.
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
13/44
1006877
*#
An additional limitation of using imposed walking speeds and in contrast to
Sekiya et al. 1997 and Ralston, 1958, is that the self-selected walking speed is
reportedly different between men and women, with men typically displaying a
higher speed (Waters et al 1988). Therefore, studies that have used mixed sex
groups (Van Engelen et al. 2010; Gjovaag et al. 2011; Maffiuletti et al. 2012;Koyama et al. 2012) may have subjected the women to a higher walking speed
than their preference, which given the linear walking-speed/oxygen-uptake
relationship (Menier and Pugh 1968) would increase EE in addition to potentially
inducing the aforementioned variability in gait.
Hansen and Wang 2011 constructed their own rocker bottom shoes from a pair
of converse high-tops and reported reduced oxygen cost as a function of
reduced shoe radius. However, each reduction in shoe radius was significantly
associated with a reduction in oxygen cost relative to a flat shoe condition only.
Unfortunately not only is it difficult to extrapolate findings from this study since
the shoes were bespoke, the sole thickness on the flat shoe was much greater
(7.62 cm) than the control shoe used in other studies and not characteristic of
commercially available footwear, a fact which may have misrepresented the
physiological response against which the unstable shoes were compared and
limits the generalisation of findings in practical application.
Conceivably, sole thickness could also have an impact on EE; Ramanthan et al.
2011 reported increases in the average amplitude of EMG signals during both
flat standing and 0-20foot inversion in response to a wearing a shoe with a
5cm sole thickness compared to a standard shoe. It is possible that these
increases in EMG in response to sole thickness are also manifested as increases
in EE and thereby misrepresented the control condition in Hansen and Wangs
experiment, although no study to my knowledge has confirmed this notion
directly and Ramanthan et al. 2011 did not examine EMG of walking in flat sole
shoes. It should also be noted that the adaption created soles in the unstable
shoe condition with a uniform compliance unlike both the MBTTMand the
FitFlopTM, which feature variable densities of sole construction.
Despite the evidence in support of wobble-board training for improving balance
and reducing injury (Holm et al. 2004; Waddington and Adams 2004; Emery et
al. 2005), some unstable shoes have made exaggerated claims. In 2011 Reebok
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
14/44
1006877
*$
Inc. was ordered by the United States Federal Trade Commission (USFTC) to pay
25 million dollars to settle fines relating to the sale of their EasytoneTMmodel
after their claims that it improved muscle tone and increase energy expenditure
were found to be unsatisfactory and not supported by quality scientific research
(USFTC 2011). David Vladeck, USFTC director of consumer protectioncommented - The FTC wants national advertisers to understand that they must
exercise some responsibility and ensure that their claims for fitness gear are
supported by sound science. The not insignificant fines levelled by the USFTC
on these two companies highlights the necessity for all products that make such
claims to be evaluated by independent research in the interests of both the
consumer and clinicians who may wish to prescribe their use. It is therefore the
intention of this study to assess the energy expenditure claims attached to the
FitFlopTM model of footwear.
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
15/44
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
16/44
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
17/44
1006877
*'
Experimental Protocol
Footwear
The footwear models used in this study were the Fit-Flop Walkstar, a cheaper
control flip-flop and the participants own shoes (figure 1a & 1b).
Figure 1a Figure 1bFitFlop Walkstar Control Flip-Flop
Thong style footwear has previously been reported to elicit an effect on gait
characteristics (Finnis and Walton 2008; Shroyer 2009; Shroyer and Weimar
2010; Zhang et al. 2013) effects that are likely to also be manifested while
wearing the FitFlopTMand could potentially influence the oxygen cost of walking.
It is therefore necessary to compare the FitFlopTMto regular thong footwear in
order to determine the true effect of the variable density sole. The participants
own shoe condition (POS) is meant as a functional comparison as an individual is
expected to replace their normal footwear with unstable footwear. All footwear
masses were also recorded using table top digital scales (Salter UK).
Measurement of Energy Expenditure
Energy expenditure was determined by use of breath-by-breath open circuit
indirect calorimetry, whereby VO2and carbon dioxide production (CO2) are
measured to establish metabolic EE during exercise (Weir 1949). Oxygen
exchange is one of the most widely accepted and reliable methods of assessing
dynamic EE (McArdle et al. 1991; Branson and Johannigman 2004).
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
18/44
1006877
*(
The indirect calorimeter used in this study was the Cosmed K4 b2 portable
metabolic system (COSMED s.r.l. Rome, Italy). The K4b2is a portable gas
analyser unit that has been reported on extensively in the literature with respect
to its reliability and validity (MacLauchlan et al 2001; Pinnington et al. 2001;
Littlewood et al. 2002; Miaolo et al. 2003; Duffield et al. 2004; Schrack et al.2010) and use in research (Brown et al. 2001; Duffield et al. 2004; Castaga et
al. 2007; Herkmans et al. 2012). The K4b2was dry gas calibrated with known
reference gases (16% O2, 5% Co2,79% Nitrogen) (Cosmed s.r.l Rome, Italy)
and volume calibrated with a 3 litre calibration syringe (Cosmed). The unit was
used according to the manufacturers handbook.
Standard Meal
Participants were instructed to maintain 2-hour gap between their previous
whole meal and attending the testing session as described by Maffiuetti et al.
2012. Participants were however, permitted to consume a snack restricted to a
standard caloric value of approx. 200-250 kcal during the interval. A list of
snacks/foods that meet this calorie value was included in the participant
recruitment email and a web link to an online calorie counter was also provided
(http://www.myfitnesspal.com/food/calorie-chart-nutrition-facts). This measure
was taken to attempt to control for the thermic effect of food that mightinfluence within-subject measurements over the duration of the testing session.
Randomisation
Randomisation of the activities and shoe conditions was performed to minimise
any potential ordering effects. Participants selected from hidden options to
determine the order of the walking activities and then for the shoe order in each
activity.
Self-Selected Walking Speed
The walking speed for each activity was participant determined in order to allow
for individual variation in height, body mass, age and aerobic capacity which can
influence the self-selected walking speed (SSWS) and gait. Additionally,
imposing a speed that is too fast may induce compensatory gait strategies while
wearing the FitFlopTMand flip-flops that might not be representative of their
normal use (Holt et al. 1995; Sekiya et al. 1997). Additionally, thong style
footwear is generally not conducive to safe and effective movement at speeds
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
19/44
1006877
*)
greater than free walking speed. Prior to testing any of the shoe conditions, the
participants were instructed to walk on a motor driven treadmill at 0% incline in
the FitFlopsTMat a speed reflective of their norm for 5 minutes to establish the
SSWS. The process was repeated at a 10% incline and both speeds were noted
and kept constant across all shoe conditions for each activity, as walking speeddirectly influences oxygen uptake (Ralston 1958). The FitFlopTMwas used as the
reference speed as it was expected that it would produce the slowest SSWS due
to its greater mass and the impact of a truncated stride length; an effect that
thong style flip-flops have been shown to elicit on the gait cycle (Finnis and
Walton 2008; Shroyer and Weimar 2010; Zhang et al. 2013).
Participant Preparation
Participants visited the University on a single occasion for testing which typically
lasted 2.5-3 hours. Participants stretched stature height and body mass were
recorded using a stadiometer and digital scales! Individuals were self-fitted with
a thoracic belt HR monitor (Polar T31), wetted to ensure proper function.
Participants were instructed on proper placement if they were unfamiliar! A
harness for the portable unit and battery was then placed on the participant. A
netted head strap (Hans Rudolph, Kansas city, MO) was used to secure the
facemask (Hans Rudolph, Kansas city, MO) ensuring complete coverage of the
nose and mouth. Improper seals were checked for by obstructing the flow
meter and asking the participant to blow gently. Any small gaps not rectifiable
by the use of a smaller mask were filled with VaselineTM. Participants were
rested in a standing position for 5 minutes to establish baseline reference
measurements of EErate VO2, VE, HR and RER according to the advice of Levine,
2005 to obtain baseline values in the posture of reference i.e. that which the
participant shall adopt during the task. The participants received a 10-minutebreak between activity conditions to allow them to recover and for physiological
variables to return to baseline values. A bladed fan was placed on a low setting
at 2 meters distance directly in front of the participant during the treadmill tasks
to replicate the airflow experienced during the cones task, which may cool the
participant and potentially alter measurements. Ambient room temperature was
maintained at 25 1C throughout intra-individual trials and was 25.2 0.85C
across separate testing sessions. Between shoe trials in each activity,
participants rested in seated position for 2 minutes and then stood until their
VO2, VE, HR, RER and EErate returned to resting levels as per the methodology
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
20/44
1006877
"+
of Porcari et al. 2011 in to control for carry over effects between trails that
would compromise their independence. In the interest of hygiene, the facemask
and flow meter were sterilised between uses with different individuals and the
HR monitor and footwear were cleaned with antibacterial wipes.
Simulated Activities of Daily Living
The activity protocols were selected to simulate the physiological demands of
common daily living tasks. The rationale being that the FitFlopTMis supposed to
replace an individuals normal footwear to provide a calorie burning boost to
activities regular daily living. The American time use survey 2011 (US Bureau of
Labour Statistics) indicates that the most common non-sedentary activities of
daily living for women are: household activities, purchasing goods and services,
and leisure. These activities would likely involve some quantity of walking in
able-bodied individuals.
A flat and 10% inclined treadmill task have been selected to replicate walking
over flat and uphill conditions. The 10% incline was selected to provide a
greater exercise stimulus in line with the work of Gjovaag et al. 2011 and Porcari
et al. 2011. A slalom style cones task (appendix 8) is designed to be
reminiscent of weaving between people and in a busy shop or street and will
allow us to investigate whether the recruitment patterns of this direction change
task influence the EE response in the three shoe types differentially to the other
tasks. In both treadmill tasks, participants were instructed to walk at the
previously determined speed and corresponding grade for at least 3 minutes
until a steady exercise state was attained, defined according to Donald et al.
1955, as a plateau of VO2with respect to time, with no meaningful deviation or
persistent trend for one minute. Participants then continued for 2 minutes atthe steady state. All participants achieved steady state within 4 minutes thus
participants walked for between 5-6 minutes in each shoe condition and task.
In the direction change protocol, participants were instructed to walk a pre-
designated path around a set of cones and to maintain a constant volitional pace
until a steady state was achieved as for the treadmill tasks. The course was
measured using a rolling line marker (Silverline), and was determined to be
18.50m in distance. Participants walked for 5-6 minutes as with the treadmill
protocol. The whole number and fraction of laps of the course completed during
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
21/44
1006877
"*
the 2 minute steady state period were recorded in order to calculate walking
speed based on distance travelled. Walking speeds were analysed for significant
differences across shoe conditions, as speed could not be controlled in this
activity condition.
Dependant Variables
The main dependant variable of interest in this study is total energy expenditure
(EEtotal). This was calculated in real-time from expired gas fractions of O2and
CO2by the K4b2software and using the Weir equation, which corrects for protein
metabolism (Weir 1949; for a more recent re-appraisal see Mansell and
Macdonald 1990). The initial value of EEtotal from the beginning of the 2-
minute SS period was subtracted from the final value of EEtotal from the end of
the 2-minute SS period to yield EEtotal for the task. The respiratory exchange
ratio (RER) is the ratio of VCO2& VO2and gives an indication of substrate
utilisation for use in EE calculations. HR was monitored as an indicator of
relative intensity and for normal physiological response.
Data Analysis
All raw physiological data for each trial was exported from the K4b2 software to
Microsoft Excel to calculate the mean values of EEtotal, EErate, VO2, VE, HR andRER for the final 2 minute period of each individual and trial. This data were
then transferred to SPSS 21.0 (IBM) for further analysis. For each variable
Shapiro-Wilks analysis was used to confirm assumptions of normality, as it is
better suited to smaller sample sizes (Shapiro and Wilks 1965). The main
effects of the shoes and tasks were analysed using a one-way analysis of
variance for repeated measures (ANOVA). However, because the study design
violates the assumption of independence, the assumption of sphericity or the
assumption that the variances of the difference between combinations of shoe
conditions are not significantly different was tested using a Mauchlys W test,
with a non-significant output (p=>0.05) affirming the assumption. If sphericity
could not be assumed, a greenhouse geiser correction of the degrees of freedom
was performed. Post-hoc Bonferroni corrected t-tests were conducted to
investigate further any significant differences elucidated by the ANOVA, as the
probability of witnessing a statistically significant event is increased with
numerous test conditions or comparisons (Bland and Altman 1995). Significance
levels were set to 0.05 for both analyses. EErate, VO2, VE, HR and RERhave
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
22/44
1006877
""
also been analysed and reported in keeping with previous EE studies of unstable
shoes, which have typically also reported these values.
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
23/44
1006877
"#
Results
The results of the physiological responses to the 3 walking tasks in each shoe
type are presented in table 2.
Table 2
Physiological responses to walking tasks in each shoe type. Data are means and
standard deviation in parenthesis.
* = main effects, Significant main effect (p
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
24/44
1006877
"$
The ANOVA revealed a main effect of shoe type for RER (F= 5.732, (2), effect
size (partial eta2) = 0.417, (p
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
25/44
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
26/44
1006877
"&
Discussion
This study is the first to examine the influence of FitFlopsTMon energy
expenditure and the findings indicate that total energy expenditure during three
simulated activities of daily living is not significantly altered while wearing the
FitFlop
TM
compared to either a regular flip-flop or an individuals own normalfootwear.
While there is little comparative data for energy expenditure while wearing
FitFlopsTMthis study extends the EMG study of FitFlopsTMby Burgess and
Swinton, 2011 into the energy expenditure domain using similar simulated tasks
of daily living. The findings of a non-significant trend toward reduced
physiological responses while wearing the FitFlopsTM compared to the flip-flops is
congruous with the authors findings of a trend towards reduced EMG activity
while wearing the FitFlopsTMcompared to a cheap thong style flip-flop. The
finding of no significant alteration in EEtotal, EErate, VE, HR or VO2is consistent
with previous research that reported no increase in EE while walking in an
unstable shoe (Porcari et al. 2011, Elkjaer et al. 2011; Santos et al. 2012;
Forghany et al. 2012). The findings are however in contrast with (Van Engelen
et al. 2010; Gjovaag et al. 2011; Hansen and Wang 2011; Maffiuletti et al.
2012; Koyama et al. 2012; Fukuchi et al 2013). RER however, did display asignificant increase during the incline-walking task but while wearing the flip-
flops as opposed to the unstable FitFlopTM.
Only one study (Maffiuletti et al. 2012) has reported RER as being significantly
reduced while wearing an unstable shoe but this observation was only made
during quiet standing and no significant difference were noted during walking.
Only one other study (Gjovaag et al. 2011) has reported RER but these authors
reported an increase of +0.02 (p
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
27/44
1006877
"'
The values obtained for VO2in the flat task while wearing unstable shoes are
similar to those reported by Gjovaag et al. 2011, lower than that reported by
Porcari et al. 2011 and Demura and Demura, 2012 (14.2 and 14.94 ml/kg/min).
The latter study featured men only, which, given that women typically display
lower VO2uptake values than men (Astrand 1952; Drinkwater 1973; Sparling1980), likely explains this finding. The VO2values were also lower than
Maffiuletti et al. 2012 (16.4 ml/kg/min) which is possibly due their sample being
formed of obese women who reportedly display elevated metabolic responses to
walking exercise compared to healthy weight women (Browning and Kram
2005). Notably, the values presented here are higher than those reported by
Hansen and Wang, 2010 in a group of mixed gender subjects, a difference
possibly related to the improved rollover characteristics of the ankle afforded by
the reduced shoe radii of their bespoke shoe (Adamczyk et al. 2006).
The current study used a cheap thong style flip-flop as the control shoe for this
experiment. The difference in shoe mass between the unstable shoe and the
control shoe was greater than the +36 to +85% range reported by other studies
that reported increases in EE (Gjovaag et al 2011; Maffiuletti et al 2012;
Demura and Demura 2012; Koyama et al 2012). However, in spite of this
increased mass, the FitFlopTM
did not significantly increase EE compared to theflip-flop. This finding is in contrast with previous studies that have reported an
increase in EE while walking in an unstable shoe (Van Engelen et al. 2010;
Gjovaag et al 2011; Maffiuletti et al 2012; Demura and Demura 2012; Koyama
et al 2012). A key difference between the latter studies and this current project
is the shoe design, the FitFlop used in this study uses a variable density sole
which is quite different to the rocker sole of the MBTTMand shape up used by
these authors.
A salient finding of this study is that EE and indeed no physiological parameter
demonstrated a significant difference between the FitFlopTMand the POS.
Despite the fact that the POS was on average 48% heavier, this significant
(p
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
28/44
1006877
"(
work performed (Nigg et al. 2000). Indeed, no significant increase in the
metabolic cost of flat walking due to footwear mass was reported by Jones et al.
1986 at a speed of 1.11 m/s, but was reported at two higher speeds (1.55 and
2.02 m/s). In contrast, Abe et al. 2004, reported no significant difference in the
oxygen cost of walking at any speed in the range 0.66-2 m/s with a 1kg or1.5kg load applied to both ankles compared to no load. It is therefore possible
that the finding of no difference in EE between the FitFlopsTMand the POS is
either due to the slower walking speed in this study, the difference in mass not
being great enough to impose an additional metabolic cost or an interaction of
both factors. This finding is in direct contrast to the only other study that has
used the participants own shoes as a control and the authors reported a 10.7%
increase while wearing the unstable shoe (MBTTM) compared to the participants
own shoe (Van Engelen et al. 2010). The authors however, did not weigh the
participants shoe and only estimated to be lighter than the MBTTM. The finding
holds important implications for the practical use of FitFlopsTMunder the premise
of increasing EE. The expectation is that an individual would wear the FitFlopTM
in place of their normal footwear and it is likely that most of their use while
walking would be performed at the preferred walking speed. Particularly since
thong style footwear is generally not conducive to very fast walking or running.
Any significant effect of the increased mass of the POS on EE may also havebeen obscured by the greater variability in mass of the POS.
This study utilised a self-selected walking speed in each walking condition.
The mean walking speed selected by the participants for the flat walking task
was 1.07 m/s, which is within the range of slow to fast walking speeds used by
Koyama et al. 2012 (0.83-1.94 m/s) but greater than the self-selected walking
speed reported by Yap et al. 2013 (0.91 m/s). However, it is slower than the
SWSS reported by Hansen and Wang 2011 (1.12 m/s), Gjovaag et al. 2011
(1.24 m/s), Maffiuletti et al. 2012 (1.36 m/s) and the imposed walking speeds
used in the studies undertaken by Van Engelen et al. 2010 (1.25 m/s) Porcari et
al. 2011 (1.34, 1.56 m/s) and Gjovaag et al. 2011 (1.60 m/s).
The walking speed in the incline task (0.93 m/s) was slower than that selected
for the flat walking task and similar to that used in the cones task (0.94 m/s).
Other studies that have used an inclination (Gjovaag et al. 2011; Porcari et al.
2011) have used a higher walking speed (1.6 and 1.56 m/s) than during their
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
29/44
1006877
")
flat walking task although this speed was imposed on the participant and not
self-selected. The slower speed selected by participants in the current study is
likely a function of the footwear type used in this study as other researchers
have used unstable shoes that feature a more conventional closed shoe design
(Zhang et al. 2013). Research has shown that the natural walking speed of anindividual is equal to their metabolic optimum, meaning that a person will always
select the walking speed that incurs the lowest metabolic cost (Ralston 1958;
Holt et al. 1995). More importantly, self-selected pace has been shown to
demonstrate the least number of variable errors or greater spatial consistency
of gait characteristics than an imposed speed above free-walking speed and
thereby optimises gait performance, energy efficiency and attentional demand
(Zarrugh et al 1974; Holt et al. 1995; Sekiya et al. 1997). By limiting the
amount of kinematic and temporal-spatial variability by using a self-selected
speed we were able to achieve greater control of the experiment such that any
variability in EE as a result of alterations to gait characteristics could be
attributed to the footwear.
A possible shortcoming of the methodology in this current study is that the
authors used the self-selected walking speed obtained in a five-minute trial of
the flat and incline-walking tasks while wearing the FitFlopsTM
and this speed wasused for all shoes. It is possible, particularly given that some participants
reported that the FitFlopTMwas more comfortable and fit better than the flip-flop,
that the shoe type may have influenced the natural or optimal walking speed.
Thong footwear reduces the stride length and increases cadence while walking
(Shroyer 2009; Shroyer and Weimar 2010; Zhang et al. 2013), an effect
possibly accentuated while wearing the flip-flop compared to the FitFlopTMdue to
the poorer fit.
The level of inclination used in this study was the same as that of Gjovaag et al.
2011 who found a significant effect of unstable shoes on oxygen uptake at a
10% grade and a fast walking speed. The findings of this study however, are in
contrast with that of Gjovaag et al. in that no increase in EE was observed at
this grade. The contrast in findings may be related to the slower self-selected
walking speed used by the authors of the current study (0.93 0.10 m/s)
compared to the faster walking speed imposed on the participants by Gjovaag et
al. (1.6 m/s). A possible explanation might be that the fast walking on a 10%
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
30/44
1006877
#+
grade in the unstable shoe was a novel and challenging task for the participants
that imposed additional task and environmental constraints, altering kinematics
and imposing a greater metabolic cost (Sparrow 1983; Newell 1986; Sparrow
and Irizarry-Lopez 1987; Lay et al. 2002). Indeed, both step and stride length
were also significantly reduced during this condition, increasing cadencecompared to a regular athletic trainer (Gjovaag et al. 2011).
The direction change task used in this study was modelled on that described by
Burgess and Swinton 2011. However, as the dimensions of the course layout
used by these authors was not described and because the participants of this
study completed repeated laps of the course as opposed to one lap, a
comparison with the walking speeds used in this current study is not possible.
It has been reported that footwear comfort may influence the metabolic cost of
movement (Burke and Papuga 2012). Although the authors of this present
study did not record subjective ratings of comfort, level of exertion or gait
characteristics, some participants did state that the FitFlopTMwas more
comfortable and easier to walk with compared to the flip-flop. Price et al. 2013
reported reduced plantar pressure in the heel and 1stmetaphalangeal joint and
pressure redistribution towards the midfoot while wearing the FitFlopsTM.
Reduced plantar pressure of the medial forefoot and redistribution of pressure
towards the midfoot is reportedly associated with increased comfort (Chen et al.
1994). It is therefore likely that the increased comfort reported by participants
in this study is explained by these findings. Indeed, during the process of this
study FitFlop Ltd. and many of its footwear models including the Walkstar
featured in this study received the American Podiatric Medical Associations Seal
of Acceptance, awarded to products that promote good foot health. An
interesting and poignant extension of Chen et als findings is that increased shoe
comfort has been associated with reduced oxygen uptake during submaximal
running (Burke and Papuga 2012). The findings of Burke and Papuga might
explain the trends towards a lower physiological response while wearing the
FitFlopsTMcompared to the flip-flops. Additionally it has been reported that
plantar pressures are higher while wearing flip flops compared to athletic
trainers (Carl and Barrett 2008).
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
31/44
1006877
#*
One might speculate about flip-flop influenced alterations in gait during the
incline condition. During uphill walking, the foot maintains a dorsiflexed position
upon heel contact, initiated in the mid-swing phase (Leroux et al. 1999).
Shroyer and Weimar, 2010 previously reported increased dorsiflexion and a
toe-gripping strategy while wearing flip-flops, which when considered inconjunction with the anecdotal reports of greater comfort and the better fit of
the FitFlopsTM, may help explain the trend towards increased physiological
responses while walking in the flip-flops compared to the FitFlopsTMpossibly
arising from increased TA activation (Shroyer 2009). However, while Burgess
and Swinton 2011 did not observe significant difference while wearing the flip-
flop compared to the FitFlopsTM, the authors did not use an inclined walking task
as in this study.
One of the major strengths of this study is that we used three different exercise
stimuli to test the influence of the FitFlopsTMon EE. Some studies (Hansen and
Wang 2011; Koyama et al. 2012; Maffiuletti et al. 2012; Demura and Demura
2012) have only assessed EE of an unstable shoe in a flat treadmill condition,
limiting the applicability of their findings to this exercise modality only.
LimitationsRegrettably this study did not examine the physiological responses of while
standing.
Generalisation of findings from this study is limited to healthy young females 20-
31 years old. Effects of the variable density sole construction may be more
pronounced in a group of less active or older individuals with reduced
proprioceptive ability or weaker balance control strategies (Fujiwara et al. 2007).
Additionally, Nigg et al. 2010 identified differences in male and female ankle
joint moments while walking in unstable shoes which further limits the ability to
generalise findings from this study to males.
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
32/44
1006877
#"
Recommendations for future research
It has been reported that the metabolic cost of walking on the treadmill is higher
compared to flat over ground walking (Dasilva et al.2007; Berryman et al.
2013). The physiological responses of wearing unstable footwear during the
treadmill tasks may not reflect the metabolic cost of the same activity on a hard
flat surface. This is a limitation of the present study and has potential
implications for the applications of these findings to free living conditions.
Indeed some of the other surfaces encountered in daily life; grass, carpet, may
impose different demands not captured by the tasks used in the current study.
A future project may wish to explore the differences in walking on flat and
treadmill conditions in unstable shoes.
Recently FitFlop Ltd. has incorporated their microwobbleboardTMtechnology into
a range of footwear for men. Men and women are reported to employ different
gait strategies when walking in unstable shoes (Nigg et al.2010) a future
project may wish to evaluate the EE response of men while walking in this new
range of footwear.
No data has been gathered regarding the effect of wearing unstable shoes in
free-living humans. The findings of finely controlled laboratory studies are often
not replicable in free-living conditions suggesting they have limited ecological
validity (Brewer 2000). Therefore a future project may wish to undertake this
using the doubly labelled water method.
Given the reports of increased comfort and the findings of Price et al. 2013
regarding plantar pressure redistribution, a future area of examination might be
to explore the kinetic and kinematic variables in the context of mitigating injury.
The thicker sole may provide additional cushioning, dissipation of ground
reaction forces and possibly better arch support, factors associated with foot
pain and injury according to the American College of Foot and Ankle Surgeons
2006.
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
33/44
1006877
##
Conclusion
The term microwobbleboard has associations with balance training and infers
increased muscle activation and energy expenditure that is associated with
unstable surface training (Wahl and Behm 2008; Anderson 2013). This
association is unjustified given the findings of this present study, which hasdemonstrated no increase in energy expenditure associated with use of the
FitFlopsTMcompared to an individuals own footwear. The practical implication is
that manipulation of energy balance cannot be achieved by replacing ones own
footwear with FitFlopsTM. Furthermore, the general trend towards reduced
physiological responses while wearing the flip-flops compared to the FitFlopsTM
indicates that a cheap, widely available flip-flop may be more effective than the
FitFlopsTMat achieving a greater metabolic response. However, given that no
significant differences were noted between the flip-flop and the POS, the
practical applicability of using any type of footwear to increase the energy
expenditure of daily living appears to be limited.
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
34/44
1006877
#$
References:
ABE, D., YANAGAWA, K. AND NIIHATA, S., 2004. Effect of Load Carriage, Load
Position and Walking Speed On The Energy Cost Of Walking.Applied
Ergonomics, 35 (4), pp. 329-335.
AMERICAN COLLEGE OF FOOT AND ANKLE SURGERY, 2007. Popular flip-flop
sandals linked to rising youth heel pain rate. [online]. Chicago, IL: American
college of foot and ankle surgery. Available from:
http://www.acfas.org/Media/Content.aspx?id=103[Accessed April 12 2014]
ADAMCZYK, P.G., COLLINS, S.H. and KUO, A.D., 2006. The advantage of a
rolling foot in human walking. The Journal of Experimental Biology, 209 (20), pp.
3953-3963.
ALKNER, B.A., TESCH, P.A. and BERG, H.E., 2000. Quadriceps EMG/force
relationship in knee extension and leg press. Medicine and Science in Sports and
Exercise, 32 (2), pp. 459-463.
ANDERSON, G.S., 2013. Comparison of EMG activity during stable and unstablepush-up protocols. European Journal of Sport Science, 13 (1), pp. 42-48.
ASTRAND, P.O., 1952. Experimental studies of physical working capacity in
relation of sex and age. Copenhagen: Munksgaard.
BAKEMAN, R. 1992. Understanding social science statistics: a spreadsheet
approach. Hillside, NJ: Erlbaum.
BERRYMAN, et al., 2013. Comparison of the metabolic energy cost of
overground and treadmill walking in older adults. European Journal of Applied
Physiology, 112 (5), pp. 1613-1620.
BLAND, J.M. and ALTMAN, D.G., 1995. Multiple significance tests: the Bonferroni
method. British Medical Journal, 310 (6973), pp. 170.
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
35/44
1006877
#%
BOYER K.A and ANDRIACCHI, T.P., 2009. Changes in running kinematics and
kinetics in response to a rockered shoe intervention. Clinical Biomechanics, 24
(10), pp. 872-876.
BRITTON, T.C., et al., 1993. Postural electromyographic responses in the armand leg following galvanic vestibular stimulation in man. Experimental Brain
Research, 94 (1), pp. 143-151.
BROWN, W. et al., 2001. Measurement of energy expenditure of daily tasks
among mothers of young children.Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, 4
(4), pp. 379-385.
BROWNING, R. C. AND KRAM, R., 2005. Energetic Cost and Preferred Speed of
Walking in Obese vs. Normal Weight Women. Obesity Research, 13 (5), pp. 891-
899.
BUCHECKER, M. et al., 2012. The effect of different Masai Barefoot Technology (MBTTM)
shoe models on postural balance, lower limb muscle activity and instability
assessment. Footwear Science, 4 (2), pp. 93-100.
BURGESS, K.E. and SWINTON, P.A., 2012. Do Fitflops increase lower limb muscle
activity? Clinical Biomechanics, 27 (10), pp. 1078-1082.
BURKE, J.R. and PAPUGA, M.O 2012. Effects of foot orthotics on running economy:
methodological considerations. Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics.
35 (4), pp. 327-336.
CARL, T.J. AND BARRETT, S.L., 2008. Computerized analysis of plantar pressure
variation in flip-flops, athletic shoes, and bare feet.Journal of the American
Podiatric Medical Association, 98 (5), pp. 374-378.
CASTAGNA, C. et al., 2007. Cardiovascular responses during recreational 5-a-side
indoor-soccer,Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, 10(2), pp. 89-95.
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
36/44
1006877
#&
CHEN, H., NIGG, B.M. and DE KONING, J., 1994. Relationship between plantar
pressure distribution under the foot and insole comfort. Clinical Biomechanics, 9
(6), pp. 335-341.
DASILVA, S. G. et al., 2011. Psychophysiological Responses to Self-PacedTreadmill and Overground Exercise. Medicine and Science in Sports Exercise, 43
(6), pp. 1114-1124.
DEMURA, T. and DEMURA, S., 2012. Physiologic Reponses During Treadmill
Walking at a Constant Speed While Wearing Shoes With a Rounded Soft Sole in
the Anterior-Posterior Direction Oxygen intake, Heart Rate, and Ratings of
Perceived Exertion. Footwear Science,4 (1), pp. 45-49.
DEMURA, T. and DEMURA, S., 2012b. Gait characteristics when walking with
rounded soft sole shoes. The Foot, 22 (1), pp. 18-23.
DONALD, K.W., BISHOP, J.M. and WADE, O.L., 1954. A study of minute-to-
minute changes of arterio-venous oxygen content difference, O2 uptake and
Cardiac output and rate of achievement of a steady state during exercise in
rheumatic heart disease. Journal of Clinical Investigation, 33 (8), pp. 1146-1167.
DRINKWATER, B., 1973. Physiological responses of women to exercise. In: J.
WILMORE, ed. Exercise and sport sciences reviews. New York, NY: Academic Press.
DUFFIELD, R. et al., 2004. Accuracy and reliability of a Cosmed K4b2 portable gas
analysis system.Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, 7 (1), pp. 11-22.
ECKEL, R.H., and KRAUSS, R.M., 1998. American Heart Association call to action:
obesity as a major risk factor for coronary heart disease. Circulation,97 (21), pp.
20992100.
ELKJAER, E.F. et al., 2011. EMG analysis of Level and Incline Walking in Reebok
EasyTone ET Calibrator. International Federation for Medical and Biological
Engineering Proceedings, 34 pp. 109-112.
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
37/44
1006877
#'
EMERY, C.A. et al., 2005. Effectiveness of a home-based balance-training
program in reducing sports-related injuries among healthy adolescents: a cluster
randomized controlled trial. Canadian Medical Association Journal,172 (6), pp.
749-754.
FINNIS, K.K. and WALTON, D., 2008. Field observations to determine the
influence of population size, location and individual factors on pedestrian walking
speeds. Ergonomics, 51 (6), pp. 827842.
FREDERICK, EC et al, 1983 The effect of shoe cushioning on the oxygen
demands on running. In: Nigg BM, Kerr BA, editors. Biomechanical Aspects of
Sport Shoes and Playing Surfaces. Calgary: University of Calgary p. 10714.
FUJIWARA, K. et al., 2007. Postural control adaptability to floor oscillation in the
elderly.Journal of Physiological Anthropology, 26 (4), pp. 485-493.
GJVAAG T.F. et al., 2011. Oxygen Uptake and Energy Expenditure During
Treadmill Walking With Masai Barefoot Technology (MBTTM) Shoes.Journal of
Physical Therapy, 23 (1), pp. 149-153.
HAWKINS, D. AND MOLE, P. 1997., Modelling energy expenditure associated
with isometric, concentric, and eccentric muscle action at the knee.Annuals of
Biomedical Engineering, 25 (5), pp. 822830.
HALL, K.D. et al., 2011. Quantification of the effect of energy imbalance on
bodyweight. The Lancet,378 (9793), pp. 826-837.
HILL, J.O. et al., 2003. Obesity and environment: where do we go from here?
Science, 299 (5608), pp. 853-855.
HOLM, L. et al. 2004. Effect of neuromuscular training on proprioception,
balance, muscle strength, and lower limb function in female team handball
players. Clinical Journal of Sports Medicine, 14 (2), pp. 88-94.
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
38/44
1006877
#(
HOF, A.L., 1984. EMG and muscle force: an introduction. Human Movement
Science, 12 (1-2), pp. 119-153.
HOLT, K.G. et al., 1995.Energetic Cost and Stability during Human Walking at
the Preferred Stride Frequency.Journal of Motor Behaviour, 27 (2), pp. 164-178.
HUBERT, H.B., et al., 1983. Obesity as an independent risk factor for
cardiovascular disease: a 26-year follow-up of participants in the Framingham
Heart Study. Circulation,67 (5), pp. 968-977.
HURKMANS, H.L., VAN, D.B. and STAM, H.J., 2010. Energy Expenditure in Adults With
Cerebral Palsy Playing Wii Sports.Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 91
(10), pp. 1577-1581.
JAMES, W.P.T., et al. 2004. Overweight and obesity (high body mass index). In:
M.Ezzati, et al. Comparative Quantification of Health Risks: global and regional
burden of disease attributable to selected major risk factors. vol 1. Geneva,
Switzerland: WHO. pp. 497-596.
JONES, B.H. et al., 1986. The energy cost of women walking and running in
shoes and boots. Ergonomics, 29 (3), pp. 439-443.
KOYAMA, K. et al., 2012. Effects of unstable shoes on energy cost during
treadmill walking at various speeds.Journal Of Sport Science and Medicine,11
(4), pp. 632-637.
KREMERS, S.P.J. et al., 2005. Cognitive Determinants of Energy Balance-
Related Behaviours. Sports Medicine, 35 (11), pp. 923-933.
LANDRY, S.C., NIGG, B.M. and TECANTE, K.E., 2010. Standing in an unstable shoe
increases postural sway and muscle activity of selected smaller extrinsic foot muscles.
Gait & posture, 32 (2), pp. 215-219.
LAY, B.S. et al., 2002. Practice effects on coordination and control, metabolic energy
expenditure and muscle activation. Human Movement Science, 21 (5-6), pp. 807-830.
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
39/44
1006877
#)
LEROUX, A. et al., 1999. Adaptation of the walking pattern to uphill walking in normal
and spinal-cord injured subjects. Experimental Brain Research, 126 (3), pp.359-368.
LITTLEWOOD, R.A., et al. 2002. Comparison of the Cosmed K4 b(2) and the
Deltatrac II metabolic cart in measuring resting energy expenditure in adults.Clinical Nutrition, 21 (6), p.p 491497.
MAFFIULETTI, N.A. et al., 2012. Unstable Shoes Increase Energy Expenditure of Obese
Patients. The American Journal of Medicine, 125 (5), pp. 513-516.
MAIOLO, C., et al. 2003. Physical activity energy expenditure measured using a
portable telemetric device in comparison with a mass spectrometer. British Journal of
Sports Medicine,37 (5), p.p 445447.
MANSELL P.I.and MACDONALD, I.A., 1990. Reappraisal of the Weir equation for
calculation of metabolic rate.American Journal of Physiology, 258 (6 Pt 2), pp.
1347-1354.
MATTSSON, E. and BROMSTROM, L.A., 1990. The increase in energy cost of
walking with an immobilized knee or an unstable ankle. Scandinavian Journal of
Rehabilitation Medicine,22 (1), pp. 5153.
MCARDLE, W.D., KATCH, F.L., AND KATCH, V.L. 1991. Exercise Physiology:
Energy, Nutrition, and Human Performance. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger.
MCLAUCHLAN, J.E., et al. 2001. Validation of the COSMED K4 b2portable
metabolic system. International Journal of Sports Medicine,22 (4), pp.280-284.
MENIER, D.R. and PUGH, L.G.C.E., et al., 1968. The Relation of Oxygen Intake
and Velocity of Walking and Running, in Competition Walkers.Journal of
Physiology, 197 (3) pp. 717-721.
MILLER, J. F. AND STAMFORD,B. A., 1987. Intensity and energy cost of weighted
walking vs. running for men and women.Journal of Applied Physiology, 62 (4), pp.
1497-1501.
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
40/44
1006877
$+
NEWELL, K.M., 1986. Constraints on the development of coordination. In: MG
Wade, HTA Whiting (Eds.), Motor Development in Children: Aspects of
Coordination and Control. Boston: Martinus Nijhoff. pp. 341-360.
NIGG, B.M. et al., 1999. Shoe inserts and orthotics for sport and physical
activities. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise Clinical Supplement: Foot And
Ankle, 31 (7), pp. S421-S428.
NIGG, B.M., STEFANYSHYN, D., AND DENOTH, J., 2000. Mechanical
considerations of work and energy.In: B.M. Nigg, B.R. MacIntosh and J. Mester,
eds.Biomechanics and biology of movement. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 5
18.
NIGG, B.M., 2005. Der MBTTMSchuh und seine biomechanische/therapeutische
Wirkungsweise (the MBTTMshoe and its biomechanical and its therapeutical
effects). Med Orthop Technik, 3 pp. 7778.
NIGG, B.M.,HINTZEN, S. ANDFERBER, R., 2006.Effect of an unstable shoe
construction on lower extremity gait characteristics. Clinical Biomechanics, 21
(1), pp. 82-88.
PEARCE, M. E. et al.,1983. Energy cost of treadmill and floor walking at self-
selected paces. European Journal of Applied Physiology and occupation
physiotherapy, 51 (1), pp. 115-119.
PINNINGTON, H.C. et al., 2001. The level of accuracy and agreement inmeasures of FEO2, FECO2and V!Ebetween the Cosmed K4b
2portable, respiratory
gas analysis system and a metabolic cart.Journal of Science and Medicine in
Sport,4 (3), pp. 324-335.
PORCARI, J.P. et al., 2011. The Physiologic and Electromyographic Responses to
Walking in Regular Athletic Shoes versus toning shoes. The Gundersen
Lutheran Medical Journal, 7 (1), pp. 3-7.
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
41/44
1006877
$*
PRICE, C. et al., 2013. The effect of unstable sandals on instability in gait in healthy
female subjects. Gait & Posture, 38 (3), pp. 410-415.
PRICE, C., GRAHAM-SMITH, P. AND JONES, R., 2013b. A comparison of plantarpressures in a standard flip-flop and a FitFlop using bespoke pressure insoles. Footwear
Science, 5 (2), pp. 111-119.
RALSTON, H.J., 1958. Energy-speed relation and optimal speed during level
walking. Internationale Zeitschrift fr Angewandte Physiologie, 17 (4), pp. 277-
283.
RAMSTRAND, N. et al., 2010. Effects of an unstable shoe construction on balance in
women aged over 50 years. Clinical Biomechanics, 25 (5), pp. 455-460.
ROMKES, J., RUDMANN, C. and BRUNNER, R., 2006. Changes in gait and EMG when
walking with the Masai Barefoot Technique. Clinical Biomechanics, 21 (1), pp.77-81.
SANTOS, A.S. et al., 2012. Rocker bottom, profile-type shoes do not increase
lower extremity muscle activity or energy cost of walking.Journal of Strength
and Conditioning Research, 26 (9), pp. 2426-2431.
SCHRACK, J.A. et al. 2010. Comparison of the Cosmed K4b2 Portable Metabolic System
in Measuring Steady-State Walking Energy Expenditure. PLoS ONE, 5 (2), e9292.
SHROYER, J.F., 2009. Influence of various thong style flip-flops on gait
kinematics and lower leg electromyography. Dissertation: Auburn University,
Kinesiology.
SHROYER, J.F. AND WEIMAR, W.H. 2010. Comparative analysis of human gait
while wearing thong-style flip-flops versus sneakers.Journal of the American
Podiatric Medical Association, 100 (4) pp. 251257.
SOUSSA, A. et al., Influence of wearing an unstable shoe construction on
compensatory control of posture. Human Movement Science, 32 (6), pp. 1353-
1364.
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
42/44
1006877
$"
SPARLING, P., 1980. A meta-analysis of studies comparing maximal oxygen
uptake in men and women. Research Quarterly in Exercise and Sport, 51 (3),
pp. 542552.
SPARROW, W.A. and IRIZARRY-LOPEZ, V.A., 1987. Mechanical Efficiency and
Metabolic Cost as Measures of Learning a Novel Gross Motor Task. Journal of
motor behavior, 19 (2), pp. 240-264.
UMBERGER, B.R., GERRITSEN, K.G.M. and MARTIN, P.E. et al., 2003. A Model of
Human Energy Expenditure. Computer methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical
Engineering, 6 (2), pp. 99-111.
US BUREAU OF LABOUR STATISTICS, 2011. American time use survey 2011 results.
[online]. Washington: U.S Department of Labour. Available from:
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/atus_06222012.pdf[Accessed 11 October
2013].
UNITES STATES FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, 2011. Reebok to Pay $25
Million in Customer Refunds To Settle FTC Charges of Deceptive Advertising of
EasytoneTMand RunToneTMShoes: Settlement Order Prohibits Reebok from
Making Unsupported Claims that Toning Shoes Strengthen, Tone Muscles.
[online]. Cleveland, OH: Federal Trade Commission. Available from:
http://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2011/09/reebok-pay-25-
million-customer-refunds-settle-ftc-charges[Accessed 15 March 2013].
VAN ENGELEN, S.J.P.M. et al., 2010. Metabolic Cost and Mechanical Work During
Walking After Tibiotalar Arthrodesis and the influence of footwear. Clinical
Biomechanics, 25 (8), pp. 809-815.
WADDINGTON, G.S. and ADAMS, R.D., 2004. The Effect of a 5-Week Wobble-
Board Exercise Intervention on Ability to Discriminate Different Degrees of Ankle
Inversion, Barefoot and Wearing Shoes: A Study in Healthy Elderly. Journal of
the American Geriatrics Society, 52 (4), pp. 573-576.
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
43/44
8/11/2019 Do Fit-Flops Increase Energy Expenditure During 3 Simulated Tasks of Daily Living?
44/44
1006877
Appendices
Appendix 1 43
Energy Expenditure Studies
Appendix 2 45Unstable shoes
Appendix 3 46Recruitment Email
Appendix 4 48Recruitment Poster
Appendix 5 49Participant Information Sheet
Appendix 6 52Physical activity readiness questionnaire
Appendix 7 54Informed Consent Form
Appendix 8 55Layout Of Cones Walking Course
Appendix 9 56Data collection sheet