How much running is too much? Identifying high-risk running sessions in a 5200-person cohort study

Abstract

Objectives: We explored whether a spike in running distance during a single session or over 1 week, compared with the preceding period, was associated with increased risk of running-related overuse injury.

Methods: Adult runners were recruited for an 18-month cohort study. Three training-related exposures were defined based on a relative change in running distance, using data collected via Garmin devices: (1) session-specific running distance relative to the longest distance run in the past 30 days; (2) 1-week period relative to the preceding 3 weeks using the acute:chronic workload ratio (ACWR); (3) 1-week period using a week-to-week ratio. Runners were categorised into one of four time-varying states: (1) regression, or up to 10% increase (reference); (2) 'small spike' between >10% and 30% increase; (3) 'moderate spike' between >30% and 100% increase; and (4) 'large spike' >100% increase. Outcome was self-reported overuse running-related injury. A multistate Cox regression model was used to estimate adjusted hazard rate ratios (HRR).

Results: Among 5205 runners (mean age 45.8 years, SD=10.4; 22% female), a total of 1820 (35%) sustained a running-related injury during 588 071 sessions. Significantly increased rates were identified for small spikes (HRR=1.64 (95% CI: 1.31 to 2.05, p=0.01)), moderate spikes (HRR=1.52 (95% CI: 1.16 to 2.00, p<0.01)) and large spikes (HRR=2.28 (95% CI: 1.50 to 3.48, p<0.01)) in single-session running distance. A negative dose-response relationship was observed for the ACWR. No relationship was identified for the week-to-week ratio.

Conclusion: A significant increase in the rate of running-related overuse injury was found when the distance of a single running session exceeded 10% of the longest run undertaken in the last 30 days.

Keywords: Athletic Injuries; Running; Sporting injuries; Sports medicine.

Figure 1. Flowchart visualising the inclusion of runners into the present study.

Figure 2. Aalen-Johansen plot visualising the probability of sustaining overuse and traumatic running-related injuries (y-axis) as a function of running sessions (x-axis). At 200 km, 30.5% (95% CI: 29.0% to 32.0%) reported an overuse injury and 12.0% (95% CI: 11.0% to 13.1%) had reported a traumatic injury.

Figure 3. Plot of overuse injury HRs as a function of change in (a) single-session change in running distance; (b) acute:chronic workload ratio (ACWR); and (c) week-to-week ratio. On the x-axis, a value of 1 represents no change, a value below 1 represents regression and a value above 1 represents progression in kilometres.