Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Sports Medicine 5/2019

01-05-2019 | Systematic Review

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Crossover Studies Comparing Physiological, Perceptual and Performance Measures Between Treadmill and Overground Running

Authors: Jayme R. Miller, Bas Van Hooren, Chris Bishop, Jonathan D. Buckley, Richard W. Willy, Joel T. Fuller

Published in: Sports Medicine | Issue 5/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Treadmills are routinely used to assess running performance and training parameters related to physiological or perceived effort. These measurements are presumed to replicate overground running but there has been no systematic review comparing performance, physiology and perceived effort between treadmill and overground running.

Objective

The objective of this systematic review was to compare physiological, perceptual and performance measures between treadmill and overground running in healthy adults.

Methods

AMED (Allied and Contemporary Medicine), CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health), EMBASE, MEDLINE, SCOPUS, SPORTDiscus and Web of Science databases were searched from inception until May 2018. Included studies used a crossover study design to compare physiological (oxygen uptake [\(\dot{V}\)O2], heart rate [HR], blood lactate concentration [La]), perceptual (rating of perceived exertion [RPE] and preferred speed) or running endurance and sprint performance (i.e. time trial duration or sprint speed) outcomes between treadmill (motorised or non-motorised) and overground running. Physiological outcomes were considered across submaximal, near-maximal and maximal running intensity subgroups. Meta-analyses were used to determine mean difference (MD) or standardised MD (SMD) ± 95% confidence intervals.

Results

Thirty-four studies were included. Twelve studies used a 1% grade for the treadmill condition and three used grades > 1%. Similar \(\dot{V}\)O2 but lower La occurred during submaximal motorised treadmill running at 0% (\(\dot{V}\)O2 MD: – 0.55 ± 0.93 mL/kg/min; La MD: − 1.26 ± 0.71 mmol/L) and 1% (\(\dot{V}\)O2 MD: 0.37 ± 1.12 mL/kg/min; La MD: − 0.52 ± 0.50 mmol/L) grade than during overground running. HR and RPE during motorised treadmill running were higher at faster submaximal speeds and lower at slower submaximal speeds than during overground running. \(\dot{V}\)O2 (MD: − 1.25 ± 2.09 mL/kg/min) and La (MD: − 0.54 ± 0.63 mmol/L) tended to be lower, but HR (MD: 0 ± 1 bpm), and RPE (MD: – 0.4 ± 2.0 units [6–20 scale]) were similar during near-maximal motorised treadmill running to during overground running. Maximal motorised treadmill running caused similar \(\dot{V}\)O2 (MD: 0.78 ± 1.55 mL/kg/min) and HR (MD: − 1 ± 2 bpm) to overground running. Endurance performance was poorer (SMD: − 0.50 ± 0.36) on a motorised treadmill than overground but sprint performance varied considerably and was not significantly different (MD: − 1.4 ± 5.8 km/h).

Conclusions

Some, but not all, variables differ between treadmill and overground running, and may be dependent on the running speed at which they are assessed.

Protocol registration

CRD42017074640 (PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews).
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Cappa DF, García GC, Secchi JD, Maddigan ME. The relationship between an athlete’s maximal aerobic speed determined in a laboratory and their final speed reached during a field test. J Sports Med Phys Fit. 2014;54(4):424–31. Cappa DF, García GC, Secchi JD, Maddigan ME. The relationship between an athlete’s maximal aerobic speed determined in a laboratory and their final speed reached during a field test. J Sports Med Phys Fit. 2014;54(4):424–31.
2.
go back to reference Jones AM, Doust JH. A 1% treadmill grade most accurately reflects the energetic cost of outdoor running. J Sports Sci. 1996;14(4):321–7.CrossRef Jones AM, Doust JH. A 1% treadmill grade most accurately reflects the energetic cost of outdoor running. J Sports Sci. 1996;14(4):321–7.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Bishop C, Hillier S, Thewlis D. The reliability of the Adelaide in-shoe foot model. Gait Posture. 2017;56:1–7.CrossRef Bishop C, Hillier S, Thewlis D. The reliability of the Adelaide in-shoe foot model. Gait Posture. 2017;56:1–7.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Sirotic A, Coutts AJ. The reliability of physiological and performance measures during simulated team-sport running on a non-motorised treadmill. J Sci Med Sport. 2008;11(5):500–9.CrossRef Sirotic A, Coutts AJ. The reliability of physiological and performance measures during simulated team-sport running on a non-motorised treadmill. J Sci Med Sport. 2008;11(5):500–9.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Edwards RB, Tofari PJ, Cormack SJ, Whyte DG. Non-motorized treadmill running is associated with higher cardiometabolic demands compared with overground and motorized treadmill running. Front Physiol. 2017;8:914.CrossRef Edwards RB, Tofari PJ, Cormack SJ, Whyte DG. Non-motorized treadmill running is associated with higher cardiometabolic demands compared with overground and motorized treadmill running. Front Physiol. 2017;8:914.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Morin JB, Sève P. Sprint running performance: comparison between treadmill and field conditions. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2011;111(8):1695–703.CrossRef Morin JB, Sève P. Sprint running performance: comparison between treadmill and field conditions. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2011;111(8):1695–703.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Pugh LG. Oxygen intake in track and treadmill running with observations on the effect of air resistance. J Physiol. 1970;207(3):823–35.CrossRef Pugh LG. Oxygen intake in track and treadmill running with observations on the effect of air resistance. J Physiol. 1970;207(3):823–35.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Maksud MG, Coutts KD, Hamilton LH. Time course of heart rate, ventilation, and \(\dot{V}\)O2 during laboratory and field exercise. J Appl Physiol. 1971;30(4):536–9.CrossRef Maksud MG, Coutts KD, Hamilton LH. Time course of heart rate, ventilation, and \(\dot{V}\)O2 during laboratory and field exercise. J Appl Physiol. 1971;30(4):536–9.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference McMiken DF, Daniels JT. Aerobic requirements and maximum aerobic power in treadmill and track running. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1976;8(1):14–7.CrossRef McMiken DF, Daniels JT. Aerobic requirements and maximum aerobic power in treadmill and track running. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1976;8(1):14–7.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference McMurray RG, Berry MJ, Vann RT, Hardy CJ, Sheps DS. The effect of running in an outdoor environment on plasma beta endorphins. Ann Sports Med. 1988;3(4):230–3. McMurray RG, Berry MJ, Vann RT, Hardy CJ, Sheps DS. The effect of running in an outdoor environment on plasma beta endorphins. Ann Sports Med. 1988;3(4):230–3.
11.
go back to reference Yngve A, Nilsson A, Sjöström M, Ekelund U. Effect of monitor placement and of activity setting on the MTI accelerometer output. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2003;35(2):320–6.CrossRef Yngve A, Nilsson A, Sjöström M, Ekelund U. Effect of monitor placement and of activity setting on the MTI accelerometer output. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2003;35(2):320–6.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Mooses M, Tippi B, Mooses K, Durussel J, Mäestu J. Better economy in field running than on the treadmill: evidence from high-level distance runners. Biol Sport. 2015;32(2):155–9.CrossRef Mooses M, Tippi B, Mooses K, Durussel J, Mäestu J. Better economy in field running than on the treadmill: evidence from high-level distance runners. Biol Sport. 2015;32(2):155–9.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Hanson NJ, Berg K, Meendering JR, Ryan C. Oxygen cost of running barefoot vs. running shod. Int J Sports Med. 2011;32(6):401–6.CrossRef Hanson NJ, Berg K, Meendering JR, Ryan C. Oxygen cost of running barefoot vs. running shod. Int J Sports Med. 2011;32(6):401–6.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Wee VM, Heimburg E, Tillaar R. Comparison of perceptual and physiological variables of running on a track, motorized treadmill, and non-motorized curved treadmill at increasing velocity. Acta Kinesiol Univ Tartu. 2016;22:20–35.CrossRef Wee VM, Heimburg E, Tillaar R. Comparison of perceptual and physiological variables of running on a track, motorized treadmill, and non-motorized curved treadmill at increasing velocity. Acta Kinesiol Univ Tartu. 2016;22:20–35.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Turner TL, Stevinson C. Affective outcomes during and after high-intensity exercise in outdoor green and indoor gym settings. Int J Environ Health Res. 2017;27(2):106–16.CrossRef Turner TL, Stevinson C. Affective outcomes during and after high-intensity exercise in outdoor green and indoor gym settings. Int J Environ Health Res. 2017;27(2):106–16.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Peserico SC, Machado AF. Comparison between running performance in time trials on track and treadmill. Braz J Kineanthrop Hum Perform. 2014;16(4):456–64.CrossRef Peserico SC, Machado AF. Comparison between running performance in time trials on track and treadmill. Braz J Kineanthrop Hum Perform. 2014;16(4):456–64.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Aubry RI, Power GA, Burr JF. An assessment of running power as a training metric for elite and recreational runners. J Strength Cond Res. 2018;32(8):2258–64.PubMed Aubry RI, Power GA, Burr JF. An assessment of running power as a training metric for elite and recreational runners. J Strength Cond Res. 2018;32(8):2258–64.PubMed
18.
go back to reference Heck H, Mader A, Hess G, Mucke S, Muller R, Hoflmann W. Justification of the 4-mmol/l lactate threshold. Int J Sports Med. 1985;6:117–30.CrossRef Heck H, Mader A, Hess G, Mucke S, Muller R, Hoflmann W. Justification of the 4-mmol/l lactate threshold. Int J Sports Med. 1985;6:117–30.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Frishberg BA. An analysis of overground and treadmill sprinting. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1983;15(6):478–85.CrossRef Frishberg BA. An analysis of overground and treadmill sprinting. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1983;15(6):478–85.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Ramsbottom R, Williams C, Kerwin DG, Nute ML. Physiological and metabolic responses of men and women to a 5-km treadmill time trial. J Sports Sci. 1992;10(2):119–29.CrossRef Ramsbottom R, Williams C, Kerwin DG, Nute ML. Physiological and metabolic responses of men and women to a 5-km treadmill time trial. J Sports Sci. 1992;10(2):119–29.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Ceci R, Hassmén P. Self-monitored exercise at three different RPE intensities in treadmill vs field running. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1991;23(6):732–8.CrossRef Ceci R, Hassmén P. Self-monitored exercise at three different RPE intensities in treadmill vs field running. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1991;23(6):732–8.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Higgins JPT, Altman DG, Gotzsche PC, et al. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2011;343:d5928.PubMedPubMedCentral Higgins JPT, Altman DG, Gotzsche PC, et al. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2011;343:d5928.PubMedPubMedCentral
23.
go back to reference Fuller JT, Bellenger CR, Thewlis D, Tsiros MD, Buckley JD. The effect of footwear on running performance and running economy in distance runners. Sports Med. 2015;45(3):411–22.CrossRef Fuller JT, Bellenger CR, Thewlis D, Tsiros MD, Buckley JD. The effect of footwear on running performance and running economy in distance runners. Sports Med. 2015;45(3):411–22.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Elbourne DR, Altman DG, Higgins JP, et al. Meta-analysis involving cross-over trials: methodological issues. Int J Epidemiol. 2002;31(1):140–9.CrossRef Elbourne DR, Altman DG, Higgins JP, et al. Meta-analysis involving cross-over trials: methodological issues. Int J Epidemiol. 2002;31(1):140–9.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Lakens D. Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: a practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Front Psychol. 2013;4:863.CrossRef Lakens D. Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: a practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Front Psychol. 2013;4:863.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, et al. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analysis. BMJ. 2003;327:557–60.CrossRef Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, et al. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analysis. BMJ. 2003;327:557–60.CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2004;328(7454):1490.CrossRef Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2004;328(7454):1490.CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Stevens CJ, Hacene J, Wellham B, Sculley DV, Callister R, Taylor L, Dascombe BJ. The validity of endurance running performance on the curve 3TM non-motorised treadmill. J Sports Sci. 2015;33:1141–8.CrossRef Stevens CJ, Hacene J, Wellham B, Sculley DV, Callister R, Taylor L, Dascombe BJ. The validity of endurance running performance on the curve 3TM non-motorised treadmill. J Sports Sci. 2015;33:1141–8.CrossRef
30.
go back to reference Bassett DR Jr, Giese MD, Nagle FJ. Aerobic requirements of overground versus treadmill running. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1985;17(4):477–81.CrossRef Bassett DR Jr, Giese MD, Nagle FJ. Aerobic requirements of overground versus treadmill running. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1985;17(4):477–81.CrossRef
31.
go back to reference Bidder OR, Goulding C, van Walsum TA, Siebert U, Halsey LG. Does the treadmill support valid energetics estimates of field locomotion? Integr Comp Biol. 2017;57(2):301–19.CrossRef Bidder OR, Goulding C, van Walsum TA, Siebert U, Halsey LG. Does the treadmill support valid energetics estimates of field locomotion? Integr Comp Biol. 2017;57(2):301–19.CrossRef
32.
go back to reference Bonen A, Gass GC, Kachadorian WA, Johnson RE. Energy cost of walking and running on different surfaces. Aust J Sci Med Sport. 1974;6(1):7. Bonen A, Gass GC, Kachadorian WA, Johnson RE. Energy cost of walking and running on different surfaces. Aust J Sci Med Sport. 1974;6(1):7.
33.
go back to reference Bowtell MV, Tan HL, Wilson AM. The consistency of maximum running speed measurements in humans using a feedback-controlled treadmill, and a comparison with maximum attainable speed during overground locomotion. J Biomech. 2009;42(15):2569–74.CrossRef Bowtell MV, Tan HL, Wilson AM. The consistency of maximum running speed measurements in humans using a feedback-controlled treadmill, and a comparison with maximum attainable speed during overground locomotion. J Biomech. 2009;42(15):2569–74.CrossRef
34.
go back to reference Brookes FB, Knibbs AA, Pantlin CM, Wilson JK. An investigation into the biomechanical and physiological differences between road and treadmill running. Res Pap Phys Educ. 1971;2(2):28–35. Brookes FB, Knibbs AA, Pantlin CM, Wilson JK. An investigation into the biomechanical and physiological differences between road and treadmill running. Res Pap Phys Educ. 1971;2(2):28–35.
35.
go back to reference Chu CY, Lu SY, Lin KF. Influences of exercise experience and exercise settings on heart rate responses during self-selected intensity exercises. J Exerc Sci Fit. 2010;8(2):73–7.CrossRef Chu CY, Lu SY, Lin KF. Influences of exercise experience and exercise settings on heart rate responses during self-selected intensity exercises. J Exerc Sci Fit. 2010;8(2):73–7.CrossRef
36.
go back to reference Dal Monte A, Fucci S, Manoni A. The treadmill as a training and simulator instrument in middle and long distance running. J Sports Med Phys Fit. 1974;14(2):67–72. Dal Monte A, Fucci S, Manoni A. The treadmill as a training and simulator instrument in middle and long distance running. J Sports Med Phys Fit. 1974;14(2):67–72.
37.
go back to reference Harte JL, Eifert GH. The effects of running, environment, and attentional focus on athletes catecholamine and cortisol-levels and mood. Psychophysiology. 1995;32(1):49–54.CrossRef Harte JL, Eifert GH. The effects of running, environment, and attentional focus on athletes catecholamine and cortisol-levels and mood. Psychophysiology. 1995;32(1):49–54.CrossRef
38.
go back to reference Heesch MW, Slivka DR. Running performance, pace strategy, and thermoregulation differ between a treadmill and indoor track. J Strength Cond Res. 2015;29(2):330–5.CrossRef Heesch MW, Slivka DR. Running performance, pace strategy, and thermoregulation differ between a treadmill and indoor track. J Strength Cond Res. 2015;29(2):330–5.CrossRef
39.
go back to reference LaCaille RA, Masters KS, Heath EM. Effects of cognitive strategy and exercise setting on running performance, perceived exertion, affect, and satisfaction. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2004;5(4):461–76.CrossRef LaCaille RA, Masters KS, Heath EM. Effects of cognitive strategy and exercise setting on running performance, perceived exertion, affect, and satisfaction. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2004;5(4):461–76.CrossRef
40.
go back to reference Meyer T, Welter JP, Scharhag J, Kindermann W. Maximal oxygen uptake during field running does not exceed that measured during treadmill exercise. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2003;88:387–9.CrossRef Meyer T, Welter JP, Scharhag J, Kindermann W. Maximal oxygen uptake during field running does not exceed that measured during treadmill exercise. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2003;88:387–9.CrossRef
41.
go back to reference Olivier S, Scott PA. Physiological, perceptual and attitudinal responses to identically matched workloads in field and laboratory testing conditions. S Afr J Res Sport Phys Educ Recreat. 1993;16(1):63–72. Olivier S, Scott PA. Physiological, perceptual and attitudinal responses to identically matched workloads in field and laboratory testing conditions. S Afr J Res Sport Phys Educ Recreat. 1993;16(1):63–72.
42.
go back to reference Panascì M, Lepers R, La Torre A, Bonato M, Assadi H. Physiological responses during intermittent running exercise differ between outdoor and treadmill running. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2017;42(9):973–7.CrossRef Panascì M, Lepers R, La Torre A, Bonato M, Assadi H. Physiological responses during intermittent running exercise differ between outdoor and treadmill running. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2017;42(9):973–7.CrossRef
43.
go back to reference Ramsbottom R, Colquhoun D, Williams C, Nute ML. Physiological and metabolic responses of trained runners to a 5 km treadmill time trial. Aust J Sci Med Sport. 1992;24(1):8–11. Ramsbottom R, Colquhoun D, Williams C, Nute ML. Physiological and metabolic responses of trained runners to a 5 km treadmill time trial. Aust J Sci Med Sport. 1992;24(1):8–11.
44.
go back to reference White JA, Pomfret DK, Rennie S, Wong J, Ford M. Fluid replacement needs of well-trained male and female athletes during indoor and outdoor steady state running. J Sci Med Sport. 1998;1(3):131–42.CrossRef White JA, Pomfret DK, Rennie S, Wong J, Ford M. Fluid replacement needs of well-trained male and female athletes during indoor and outdoor steady state running. J Sci Med Sport. 1998;1(3):131–42.CrossRef
45.
go back to reference Taunton JE, Ryan MB, Clement DB, McKenzie DC, Lloyd-Smith DR, Zumbo BD. A prospective study of running injuries: the Vancouver Sun Run “in training” clinics. Br J Sports Med. 2003;37(3):239–44.CrossRef Taunton JE, Ryan MB, Clement DB, McKenzie DC, Lloyd-Smith DR, Zumbo BD. A prospective study of running injuries: the Vancouver Sun Run “in training” clinics. Br J Sports Med. 2003;37(3):239–44.CrossRef
46.
go back to reference Davies CT. Effects of wind assistance and resistance on the forward motion of a runner. J Appl Physiol Respir Exerc Physiol. 1980;48(4):702–9. Davies CT. Effects of wind assistance and resistance on the forward motion of a runner. J Appl Physiol Respir Exerc Physiol. 1980;48(4):702–9.
47.
go back to reference Saunders PU, Pyne DB, Telford RD, Hawley JA. Reliability and variability of running economy in elite distance runners. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2004;36(11):1972–6.CrossRef Saunders PU, Pyne DB, Telford RD, Hawley JA. Reliability and variability of running economy in elite distance runners. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2004;36(11):1972–6.CrossRef
48.
go back to reference Kong PW, Koh TM, Tan WC, Wang YS. Unmatched perception of speed when running overground and on a treadmill. Gait Posture. 2012;36(1):46–8.CrossRef Kong PW, Koh TM, Tan WC, Wang YS. Unmatched perception of speed when running overground and on a treadmill. Gait Posture. 2012;36(1):46–8.CrossRef
49.
go back to reference Schucker L, Parrington L. Thinking about your running movement makes you less efficient: attentional focus effects on running economy and kinematics. J Sports Sci. 2019;37(6):638–46.CrossRef Schucker L, Parrington L. Thinking about your running movement makes you less efficient: attentional focus effects on running economy and kinematics. J Sports Sci. 2019;37(6):638–46.CrossRef
50.
go back to reference Smith JAH, McKerrow AD, Kohn TA. Metabolic cost of running is greater on a treadmill with a stiffer running platform. J Sports Sci. 2017;35:1592–7.CrossRef Smith JAH, McKerrow AD, Kohn TA. Metabolic cost of running is greater on a treadmill with a stiffer running platform. J Sports Sci. 2017;35:1592–7.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Crossover Studies Comparing Physiological, Perceptual and Performance Measures Between Treadmill and Overground Running
Authors
Jayme R. Miller
Bas Van Hooren
Chris Bishop
Jonathan D. Buckley
Richard W. Willy
Joel T. Fuller
Publication date
01-05-2019
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Sports Medicine / Issue 5/2019
Print ISSN: 0112-1642
Electronic ISSN: 1179-2035
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-019-01087-9

Other articles of this Issue 5/2019

Sports Medicine 5/2019 Go to the issue