Abstract
Purpose Understanding users’ perceived usefulness and ease of use of technologies will influence their adoption and sustained use. The objectives of this study were to determine the metrics deemed important by runners for monitoring running-related injury (RRI) risk, and identify the barriers and facilitators to their use of injury focused wearable technologies.
Methods A qualitative focus group study was undertaken. Nine semi-structured focus groups with male (n=13) and female (n=14) recreational runners took place. Focus groups were audio and video recorded, and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were thematically analysed. A critical friend approach was taken to data coding, and multiple methods of trustworthiness were executed.
Results Excessive loading and inadequate recovery were deemed the most important risk factors to monitor for RRI risk. Other important factors included training activities, injury status and history, and running technique. The location and attachment method of a wearable device and the design of a smartphone application were identified as important barriers and facilitators, with receiving useful injury-related feedback identified as a further facilitator.
Conclusions Overtraining, training-related and individual- related risk factors are essential metrics that need to be monitored for RRI risk. RRI apps should include the metrics deemed important by runners, once there is supporting evidence- based research. The difficulty and/or ease of use of a device, and receiving useful feedback will influence the adoption of injury focused running technologies. There is a clear willingness from recreational runners to adopt injury focused wearable technologies whilst running.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
KM was responsible for funding acquisition for this research project. This publication has emanated from research supported by Science Foundation Ireland (SFI) under Grant Number SFI/12/RC/2289_P2, co-founded by the European Regional Development Fund. Funding for the study was received as part of a large-scale, centre-wide funding from Science Foundation Ireland to develop Insight (the national research centre for data analytics: www.insight-centre.org). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Not Applicable
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Dublin City University Research Ethics Committee provided written ethical approval for this study (DCUREC2021_134)
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Not Applicable
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Not Applicable
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Not Applicable
Data Availability
All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.
