Scholarlink

Background <p>Walking is accessible, but strategies that increase energy expenditure (EE) without additional time may be useful. We examined EE during treadmill walking with a commercial plantar-vibration shoe combined with internal-focus attentional instructions in healthy young women.</p> Methods <p>Twenty-one healthy female university students completed four randomized 5-min treadmill walking trials. This analysis compared three vibration-shoe conditions: non-vibration (Vib-Off), vibration with instruction to feel it strongly (Vib-On), and vibration with instruction to attend to vibration and tactile insole protrusions (Vib+PSI). A conventional-shoe Control trial was used only to code actual trial position. Speed was constant within participants. Breath-by-breath VO2 and VCO2 were measured, and Weir-derived EE was averaged over 180–300&#xa0;s. Both vibration conditions involved internal focus; vibration characteristics were not objectively measured.</p> Results <p>Median EE was 2.66, 2.82, and 2.82&#xa0;kcal/min in Vib-Off, Vib-On, and Vib+PSI, respectively (Friedman chi-square = 13.802, <i>p</i> = 0.001). EE was higher versus Vib-Off in Vib-On (Z = -2.850, Bonferroni-adjusted <i>p</i> = 0.013; paired Hodges-Lehmann difference 0.17&#xa0;kcal/min, BCa 95% CI 0.07–0.27) and Vib+PSI (Z = -3.267, Bonferroni-adjusted <i>p</i> = 0.003; difference 0.20, BCa 95% CI 0.11–0.50). Vib+PSI did not differ from Vib-On (difference 0.02, BCa 95% CI -0.04–0.15; Bonferroni-adjusted <i>p</i> = 1.000). In the preferred mixed-effects model using actual trial position 1–4, no period term was significant and both contrasts versus Vib-Off remained significant; in a secondary compressed-period model, only Vib+PSI remained significant.</p> Conclusions <p>Commercial plantar-vibration-shoe walking under internal-focus instructions was associated with small EE differences. The absolute magnitude was small, practical significance and measurement-error exceedance are uncertain, and vibration-specific effects cannot be isolated. Findings are preliminary and hypothesis-generating.</p> Trial registration <p>UMIN Clinical Trials Registry, UMIN000061453. Registered 5 May 2026. Retrospectively registered.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Energy expenditure during treadmill walking with a commercial plantar-vibration shoe and internal-focus attentional instructions in healthy young women: an exploratory randomized crossover study

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年7月29日

查看全文
  • Ryota Okoba,
  • Masaki Hasegawa

摘要

Background

Walking is accessible, but strategies that increase energy expenditure (EE) without additional time may be useful. We examined EE during treadmill walking with a commercial plantar-vibration shoe combined with internal-focus attentional instructions in healthy young women.

Methods

Twenty-one healthy female university students completed four randomized 5-min treadmill walking trials. This analysis compared three vibration-shoe conditions: non-vibration (Vib-Off), vibration with instruction to feel it strongly (Vib-On), and vibration with instruction to attend to vibration and tactile insole protrusions (Vib+PSI). A conventional-shoe Control trial was used only to code actual trial position. Speed was constant within participants. Breath-by-breath VO2 and VCO2 were measured, and Weir-derived EE was averaged over 180–300 s. Both vibration conditions involved internal focus; vibration characteristics were not objectively measured.

Results

Median EE was 2.66, 2.82, and 2.82 kcal/min in Vib-Off, Vib-On, and Vib+PSI, respectively (Friedman chi-square = 13.802, p = 0.001). EE was higher versus Vib-Off in Vib-On (Z = -2.850, Bonferroni-adjusted p = 0.013; paired Hodges-Lehmann difference 0.17 kcal/min, BCa 95% CI 0.07–0.27) and Vib+PSI (Z = -3.267, Bonferroni-adjusted p = 0.003; difference 0.20, BCa 95% CI 0.11–0.50). Vib+PSI did not differ from Vib-On (difference 0.02, BCa 95% CI -0.04–0.15; Bonferroni-adjusted p = 1.000). In the preferred mixed-effects model using actual trial position 1–4, no period term was significant and both contrasts versus Vib-Off remained significant; in a secondary compressed-period model, only Vib+PSI remained significant.

Conclusions

Commercial plantar-vibration-shoe walking under internal-focus instructions was associated with small EE differences. The absolute magnitude was small, practical significance and measurement-error exceedance are uncertain, and vibration-specific effects cannot be isolated. Findings are preliminary and hypothesis-generating.

Trial registration

UMIN Clinical Trials Registry, UMIN000061453. Registered 5 May 2026. Retrospectively registered.