Buzz
Running communities are full of myths about footwear. One idea suggests you must get fitted for the right shoe tailored to your feet, which requires a visit to a local running store. Another belief claims you need minimalist shoes, while yet another insists you should never wear minimalist shoes. There’s also the idea that if you're experiencing discomfort or injury, your shoes are likely to blame. However, none of these theories are supported by solid scientific evidence. Do our shoes truly affect our injury risk? A recent Cochrane review explored this question and came up with no clear answer.
The review examined research comparing various shoe types. To clarify: motion-control shoes are designed to prevent feet from rolling inward excessively (“overpronating”). Stability shoes aim to limit that motion to a lesser degree. Neutral shoes don’t alter the natural foot strike. Cushioned shoes are similar to neutral shoes but with added padding. Minimalist shoes offer minimal cushioning, designed to let your feet move more naturally. Additionally, there are shoes with both soft and firm midsoles. Advocates for each type believe the right shoe can reduce your injury risk.
If shoes were as pivotal in injury prevention as commonly believed, the review would have found injury rates linked to shoe type. Instead, the meta-analysis of 12 studies with over 11,000 participants showed no significant findings. Some key conclusions include:
Do neutral/cushioned shoes lead to more or fewer injuries than minimalist shoes? According to the authors, the shoe choice “may make little or no difference,” and there isn’t even a clear consensus on which type runners prefer. (In one study, participants were more satisfied with minimalist shoes; in another, it was the opposite.)
Do motion-control shoes cause more or fewer injuries compared to neutral/cushioned shoes? “It is uncertain...because the quality of the evidence is considered very low.” In other words, the studies don’t provide a definitive answer.
Do shoes with a soft midsole cause more or fewer injuries than those with a hard midsole? “Soft midsole shoes may make little or no difference in the number of runners sustaining lower limb injuries when compared to hard midsole shoes.”
Do stability shoes result in more or fewer injuries than neutral/cushioned shoes? “It is uncertain whether stability shoes reduce the number of lower limb injuries compared to neutral/cushioned shoes.”
Do stability shoes lead to fewer injuries than motion-control shoes? “It is uncertain whether motion-control shoes reduce the number of injuries compared to stability shoes.”
And finally, the big question: Does prescribing shoes based on foot type help reduce injury? “There was no evidence that shoes prescribed based on static foot posture reduced injuries compared to shoes not prescribed based on foot posture in military recruits.”
Cochrane reviews are highly respected for answering questions like these with the best available scientific evidence. Despite the extensive data, this review was unable to conclude that any specific shoe category lowers injury rates more than others. Moreover, there’s no evidence to suggest that finding the right shoe for you reduces injury risk.
The findings should be taken with caution. Reviews are only as reliable as the studies they examine. The authors point out that many of the studies in their review were of “low certainty.” Therefore, while it’s possible one type of shoe is better than another, the difference may not be significant enough to show up in the results.
One exception is the aspect of prescribing shoes based on foot type. This is based on more reliable evidence, with what’s called “moderate certainty.” Essentially, this supports the idea that you probably don’t need a professional foot evaluation to choose the right shoes for yourself.
So, what running shoes should I purchase?
Out of all the theories considered in this study, the only one that holds up is the idea that you should run in shoes that feel comfortable. We’ve been advocating for this here at Mytour for almost a decade, and it’s also the advice you’ll hear from many experienced running coaches.
That doesn’t rule out the possibility that shoe choice might influence injury risk. It’s conceivable that more meticulously designed studies could detect subtle differences between shoe types when assigned to different kinds of runners.
Ultimately, I’d say if you’re satisfied with your shoes, there’s no need to change them. However, I’d also like everyone to please stop advising new runners to check their footprints and determine their foot type. And I’d doubly appreciate it if people would stop blaming shoes for running injuries without considering other factors that contribute to injury. For example, how much you run, the type and intensity of your running, and even factors like whether you strength train likely have a bigger impact on injury risk than your shoe choice.
I’ve shared before the struggles I faced with running shoes when I first started and how I spent years running intermittently with unexplained foot pain, even after purchasing an expensive pair of motion-control shoes that I was told I needed. In the end, what worked was trusting my instincts and returning to the same style of shoe I had been advised against because it supposedly lacked support. (I ended up running a pain-free marathon in that exact shoe.)
In many fitness areas, people tend to overemphasize details that don’t matter much in the long run. Shoe companies work hard to persuade you that their latest model is superior to your current pair. Running stores and publications also want to convince you of the necessity of their expertise. But sometimes, you can just try on shoes, see what feels best, and choose those, without any guilt.
