Running injuries are all multi-factorial which means they are often due to a variety of reasons ultimately causing an imbalance between the workload being placed on the body and the body’s ability to withstand and adapt to it. This overload can be due to training errors, non-optimization of lifestyle or ecosystem factors (sleep, protein intake, hydration, etc), and/or specific deficits in strength, mobility, movement control, power, and the running gait itself.
Because of the multi-factorial aspect of running injuries, it is difficult to determine the likelihood of sustaining a running injury. I was surprised when this study demonstrated the Running Readiness Scale (RRS) was able to determine injury risk in a population of runners across a training cycle.
If you’re a runner in Augusta, GA and want to determine your injury risk with this Running Readiness Scale, please read through the rets of this post, fill out the form at the end of the page, and I’ll contact you within 24 hours.
The Running Readiness Scale (RRS) was utilized on 113 NCAA Division III track and XC athletes prior to their respective track or cross country season. Those who scored 3, or less, on the RRS composite score were 5 times more likely to develop a running-related injury compared to those who scored a 4 or 5. Failed scores on the individual Double Leg Hop Test and the Wall Sit Tests also indicated increased injury risk. (Luedke, 2015)
The Running Readiness Scale (RRS) was performed on 56 novice female runners to determine if the peak joint angles for the hip and knee were similar between the results seen on the RRS movement-based tests and during the running gait cycle. Several joint angles often seen with running related injuries, such as hip adduction, knee abduction, and contralateral pelvic drop were correlated with joint angles and scores on this test. Those who scored higher on the RRS demonstrated decreased knee abduction while running (which has been shown to be correlated with injuries, although inconsistently, in research) (Harrison, 2019)
The Running Readiness Scare (RRS) was performed on 16 cross country athletes before their cross country season. 6, of the 16, cross country runners became injured during the subsequent XC season. Individual scores on the RRS were not significantly different between those who were injured and noninjured. However, this study did not compare the composite score of the RRS among those who were injured and non-injured. (Payne, 2019)
The RRS is used in two primary ways:
To improve decision making regarding returning to running following an injury, period of inactivity, or pregnancy (as included in the decision making process of this Delphi study regarding return to running criteria for postpartum runners).
Many runners resume running far too quickly following injuries, pregnancy, or long periods of inactivity and these tests can serve as part of the criteria to determine if a runner is recovered and/or strong enough to resume running training.
To determine running injury risk prior to a racing season.
The capacity for this scale to collectively determine injury risk has been evaluated in one study which demonstrated those scoring 3, or less, were significantly more likely to be injured compared to those scoring 4 or 5. This study was performed on much more competitive track and cross country runners and these results may not be fully applicable to recreational runners. However, generally speaking if a test identifies injury risk in a more fit population, it is generally able to perform similarly with recreational athletes but the opposite is not true. Far more often, research will assess recreational runners which makes the applicability to more competitive runners far less likely.
The RRS should not be used in the following ways:
To identify deficits related to injury risk or a particular injury.
This scale operates much more as a screen than a particular test or outcome measurement. Screens are used to identify risk so that more individualized testing can be performed. For example, high blood pressure can be measured with a blood pressure cuff (sphygmomanometer) but further testing is required to determine root causes of this high blood pressure reading. Similarly, a person may fail the single leg squat test and that can be used to inform decision making but ultimately requires more thorough testing to determine why the test was failed.
To use the Single Leg Squat Test as an example, we can identify whether a runner can pass or fail the test but we cannot identify if this is due to mobility restrictions of the hip/knee/ankle/foot, strength deficits, or movement control deficits. In this scenario, I would advise someone to get more fully evaluated to assess the reason why the test was failed as many runners can demonstrate similar looking issues for vastly different reasons.
The RRS should not be used as the sole method for exercise prescription.
I say the sole reason as the test positions themselves are very suitable exercises in their own right and it certainly isn’t wrong to use them. Single Leg Squats and Step Ups/Downs are staples to many running rehabilitation programs as an example. But, similar to the aforementioned point about these tests not being able to identify very specific deficits, they also cannot be used to treat them either.
As an example, if someone demonstrates a failing score on the Step Up Test, repeatedly performing step ups as an exercise will improve this test performance. But if the failed test is due disproportionately more to quad weakness, using only the step up exercise to improve it will likely result in continued compensations with the quad weakness being addressed suboptimally. Contrastingly, another runner may have strong quads but fail the Step Up Test due more to lateral hip weakness which limits an optimal position for the hips, and therefore knees, to exert optimal force. These two runners would require very different treatment strategies to improve The Step Up Test.
Each test on the RRS is performed for 1-minute with the following grading criteria for each test listed below. For the sake of the composite score for this test, these are the considerations used to determine a passing or failing score. In a clinical setting, other aspects of the test performance would also be utilized such as performance disparities between legs (even if both are scoring the same), perceived effort, comfort during the tests, and other movement deviations not included within the grading criteria.
In general, the Wall Sit Test and Plank test are scored for time to complete, and the remaining movement based tests are scored based on the ability to perform while maintaining the cadence of the metronome and while maintaining a level hip/pelvic position and minimizing inward knee movement (called knee valgus/abduction or hip adduction).
Fill out this form below if you’re interested in receiving this Running Readiness Scale screening or are interested in any of my other services for runners which includes Physical Therapy, private running coaching, strength assessments for runners, and strength and injury prevention program design.
No purchase of my services is necessary, or expected, to receive one of these 20 free Running Readiness Assessments.
Automated page speed optimizations for fast site performance