Outcomes were averaged across eight steps within each subject and condition. However, I-BET-762 concentration we also tracked which model was fit to individual steps and whether a VIP was present. A paired t test was performed between the shod and the BF conditions after instruction for each outcome variable. A p value of less than 0.05 was used to indicate a statistical difference. Vertical stiffness was compared during IL only, and not to the peak VGRF. Pearson correlation coefficients were computed to establish the relationship

between change in VILS and changes in the VALR and VILR. All computations were performed in MATLAB. Forty-five of 49 (92%) patients employed an RFS during their typical shod run, while two (4%) ran with an MFS and two (4%) ran with an FFS pattern. During the BF run, after instruction, 47 of 49 (96%) patients employed an FFS pattern, while only one (2%) used an MFS and one (2%) an RFS pattern. An impact transient was identified in 384 steps (98% of steps) during Vorinostat in vitro the shod condition and only 99 (25% of steps) during the instructed BF condition. Of these, 34 shod and 58 BF steps did not have a VIP (Table

1). Eighty-six percent (n = 42) had an impact transient in all eight steps, while only 12% (n = 6) had an impact in seven of eight steps and 2% (n = 1) had an impact in six of eight steps. When running BF, with instruction, 47% of patients had no impact transient in any of the eight steps (n = 23), and only 14% (n = 7) had an impact transient in five or more steps. Both instantaneous and average loading rates were significantly reduced (p < 0.0001) during the instructed BF run compared to the shod condition ( Table 2). VALR during shod running ranged between 34.9 and 138.3 BW/s. All participants with the exception of one (>4 SD from the mean), reduced their VALR to between 15.4 and 36.8

BW/s during the instructed BF run ( Fig. 2). On average, VILR and VALR were reduced by 51% and 57% respectively, from shod to instructed BF runs. Vertical stiffness during initial loading (VILS) was 33% lower for the instructed BF compared to the shod run (Table 2). Stiffness during initial loading was correlated to both VALR (r = 0.726, p < 0.0001) and VILR (r = 0.658, Astemizole p < 0.0001). The proportion of patients with at least one step without an impact transient increased from 14% during the shod run to 92% during the BF run following instruction. When patients did have an impact transient in at least one step during BF running (53%), the average VILS was still reduced compared to the shod condition ( Table 3). The R2 value describing the fit for the simple, constant stiffness model was higher on average in the BF condition (0.974 ± 0.024) compared to the shod (0.820 ± 0.121). The variable stiffness model provided a better fit than the simple model for the shod condition with an R2 of 0.987 ± 0.008. Instructed BF running resulted in a significant decrease of 53% (p < 0.