Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2024 Aug 9;19(8):e0306715.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0306715. eCollection 2024.

Comparison of bone mineral density of runners with inactive males: A cross-sectional 4HAIE study

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Comparison of bone mineral density of runners with inactive males: A cross-sectional 4HAIE study

Miroslav Krajcigr et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to determine whether running is associated with greater bone mineral density (BMD) by comparing the BMD of regularly active male runners (AR) with inactive nonrunner male controls (INC). This cross-sectional study recruited 327 male AR and 212 male INC (aged 18-65) via a stratified recruitment strategy. BMD of the whole body (WB) and partial segments (spine, lumbar spine (LS), leg, hip, femoral neck (FN), and arm for each side) were measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and lower leg dominance (dominant-D/nondominant-ND) was established by functional testing. An ANCOVA was used to compare AR and INC. The AR had greater BMD for all segments of the lower limb (p<0.05), but similar BMD for all segments of the upper limb (p>0.05) compared with INC. Based on the pairwise comparison of age groups, AR had greater BMD of the ND leg in every age group compared with INC (p<0.05). AR had grater BMD of the D leg in every age group except for (26-35 and 56-65) compare with INC (p<0.05). In the youngest age group (18-25), AR had greater BMD in every measured part of lower extremities (legs, hips, femoral necks) compared with INC (p<0.05). In the 46-55 age group AR had greater BMD than INC (p < 0.05) only in the WB, D Leg, D neck, and ND leg. In the 56-65 age group AR had greater BMD than INC (p<0.05) only in the ND leg. Overall, AR had greater BMD compared with INC in all examined sites except for the upper limbs, supporting the notion that running may positively affect bone parameters. However, the benefits differ in the skeletal sites specifically, as the legs had the highest BMD difference between AR and INC. Moreover, the increase in BMD from running decreased with age.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Graphs of BMD means of different age groups and measured sites.

Similar articles

References

    1. Johnell O, Kanis JA. An estimate of the worldwide prevalence and disability associated with osteoporotic fractures. Osteoporosis International. 2006;17: 1726–1733. doi: 10.1007/s00198-006-0172-4 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Klotzbuecher CM, Ross PD, Landsman PB, Abbott TA, Berger M. Patients with prior fractures have an increased risk of future fractures: A summary of the literature and statistical synthesis. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research. 2000;15: 721–739. doi: 10.1359/jbmr.2000.15.4.721 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Cummings SR, Nevitt MC, Browner WS, Stone K, Fox KM, Ensrud KE, et al.. Risk Factors for Hip Fracture in White Women. New England Journal of Medicine. 1995;332: 767–773. doi: 10.1056/nejm199503233321202 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Burge R, Dawson-Hughes B, Solomon DH, Wong JB, King A, Tosteson A. Incidence and economic burden of osteoporosis-related fractures in the United States, 2005–2025. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research. 2007;22: 465–475. doi: 10.1359/jbmr.061113 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bachrach LK, Hastie T, Wang MC, Narasimhan B, Marcus R. Bone mineral acquisition in healthy Asian, Hispanic, black, and Caucasian youth: A longitudinal study. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism. 1999;84: 4702–4712. doi: 10.1210/jcem.84.12.6182 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types