Training errors and running related injuries: a systematic review.
Level 2 - randomized trial
Systematic review composed primarily of observational cohort and case-control studies with few randomized trials
What was done
A systematic review was conducted across PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and SportDiscus to evaluate associations between training characteristics (volume, distance, duration, frequency, intensity, pace) and running-related injuries in runners aged 18 to 65. Included studies evaluated general or lower extremity/lower back running-related injuries. Methodological quality was scored using 11- to 16-item quality assessment tools.
What was found
From 4,561 screened records, 31 studies were included: 13 prospective cohorts, 9 retrospective cohorts, 6 case-control studies, and 3 randomized controlled trials. The mean methodological quality score was 44.1%. Findings were conflicting across studies regarding the relationship of volume, duration, intensity, and frequency with running-related injuries. The abstract reports no numeric risk estimates or pooled effect sizes.
Why it matters
Despite widespread clinical assumption that training errors cause running injuries, existing evidence is inconsistent and methodologically limited. Standardized definitions of training metrics and prospective designs are required before establishing definitive injury prevention guidelines.
Limits
The included literature had a low average quality score (44.1%), relied heavily on observational and retrospective designs, and lacked uniform definitions or objective measurements of training exposures. No quantitative meta-analysis was performed.
Cited by
- context Increasing physical training volume by no more than approximately 10% per week is a progression guideline to allow tissue tolerance to adapt and prevent overuse injury.