Unraveling the physiologic paradoxes that underlie exercise prescription for stress fracture prevention

Abstract

The effects of exercise on stress fracture risk are paradoxical. Exercise can promote both bone formation and resorption, which in turn, can reduce and increase risk of stress fractures, respectively. We review classic and current literature that suggests that the processes that underlie these responses to exercise are distinct. Bone remodeling involves osteoclastic resorption of fatigue-damaged bone, coupled with subsequent bone deposition to replace the damaged tissue. Bone modeling involves the independent action of osteoblasts and osteoclasts forming or resorbing bone, respectively, on a surface. In the formation mode, modeling results in increased bone stiffness, strength, and resistance to fatigue. Both the remodeling and modeling responses to exercise require significant time for newly deposited bone to fully mineralize. We propose that recognizing these two distinct physiologic pathways and their related time courses reveals the theoretical basis to guide exercise prescription to promote bone health during periods of heightened stress fracture risk. Such guidance may include minimizing rapid increases in the duration of repetitive exercises that may cause fatigue damage accrual, such as long-distance running and marching. Rather, limiting initial exercise characteristics to those known to stimulate bone formation, such as short-duration, moderate-to-high impact, dynamic, and multidirectional activities with rest insertion, may increase the fatigue resistance of bone and consequently minimize stress fracture risk.

Keywords

Exercise mechanical loading adaptive bone formation training program bone stress fracture

Impact Statement

The role of exercise in the pathophysiology of stress fracture is seemingly paradoxical because exercise can simultaneously result in a bone resorption response, which occurs in the short term to repair fatigue damage, and a formation response that makes bones stronger in the long term. These physiological processes, in turn, simultaneously increase and decrease the risk of stress fracture, respectively. Much of the confusion in the field arises from attributing bone metabolic responses to exercise solely to the process of bone remodeling. In this minireview, we review classic and current literature that proposes that bone remodeling serves to repair fatigue damage that occurs with exercise, while a distinct mechanism called bone formation modeling serves to form bone in response to exercise, independent of prior resorption. Recognition of these distinct physiologic pathways helps move the field forward by revealing straightforward practical strategies for exercise prescription to prevent stress fractures.

Introduction

The responses of bone to exercise are paradoxical in that they include both bone resorption and formation. Resorption and formation after exercise are often erroneously attributed solely to bone remodeling – a process that begins with focal osteoclastic resorption, followed by osteoblastic bone deposition within a basic multicellular unit (BMU). As we propose in this article, classic and current literature suggest that a fundamental flaw in this focus is that bone functional adaptation in response to increased mechanical loading through remodeling would require resorption prior to deposition within each BMU. Bone resorption as a prerequisite to formation is inefficient, would require extensive time for adaptation, and initial resorption would leave bone transiently weaker and less resilient to successive exercise bouts.

In this minireview, we emphasize two separate physiologic processes that are responsible for the response of bone to exercise, instead of focusing solely on bone remodeling. Specifically, we propose that bone formation in response to exercise is largely an adaptive bone formation modeling response.^1
–3 In bone formation modeling, formation is altogether independent of resorption, which means novel formation of bone does not require prior resorption.^1,4 Bone remodeling in response to increased mechanical loading can be at least partially attributed to the repair of fatigue damage, which would require resorption of bone prior to deposition. Appreciating the independent physiologic phenomena underlying the distinct processes of bone remodeling and modeling provides the theoretical concepts for exercise prescription to prevent stress fractures – a problem that still plagues military recruits and endurance athletes nearly a century and a half after these injuries were first recognized.^5
–7

Bone remodeling and modeling in the pathophysiology of stress fractures

Stress fractures are bone tissue injuries that occur with repetitive mechanical loading. They are debilitating injuries that require time away from sport or military duty and, for military members, can result in separation from service.⁸ They are common during periods of rapid increases in exercise duration and intensity such as seen during the initial months of military training⁹ and at the beginning of a competitive athletic season.¹⁰ The paradox that exercise can both contribute to and protect from stress fractures, and the practical significance of such observations, is explained with recognition of two distinct physiological responses of bone to exercise that can occur simultaneously – bone remodeling and modeling.

The role of remodeling in the pathophysiology of stress fractures

Bone deforms in response to mechanical loading from exercise. The measure of bone deformation, defined as a change in length divided by its original length, is termed, “strain” (Figure 1). Bone strain can lead to the generation of microscopic fatigue damage, or microdamage, in the form of linear microcracks or diffuse, sublamellar tissue damage (Figure 1, Remodeling Loop).¹¹ Accrual of this tissue damage can decrease bone stiffness, strength, and toughness and can eventually lead to failure of the bone, as was shown in racehorses.^11,12 Fortunately, tissue damage in bone is targeted for removal through bone remodeling.¹¹ Specifically, osteocytes, which are the mechanosensitive resident cells in bone,¹³ and their dendritic processes detect damage that disrupts the osteocyte syncytium and replaces it with healthy tissue through a process called targeted remodeling.^14,15 Osteocyte apoptosis at damaged loci occurs within 24h of fatigue loading and microdamage induction.^16
–18 Consequently, adjacent viable osteocytes within 100 and 300 µm of microcrack loci promote osteoclastogenesis by releasing vascular endothelial growth factor and receptor activator of NF-κB ligand (RANKL), as well as by downregulating RANKL’s decoy receptor, osteoprotegerin.^19,20 These cytokines are necessary for initiating intracortical remodeling by promoting the osteoclast recruitment, proliferation, and differentiation necessary to resorb the damaged bone around the dead osteocytes. During targeted remodeling, osteoclasts resorb damaged bone within 10–14 days,^17,21 with the removal of 40% of microdamage number density within 10 days.¹⁷ This resorption of bone in targeted remodeling transiently increases intracortical porosity (Figure 1, Remodeling Loop).

Figure 1.

Mechanical loading paradox: Strains within bone tissue, generated by mechanical loading during exercise, can result in microdamage accrual and targeted remodeling that can temporarily decrease the stiffness and further resistance to microdamage in a positive feedback manner that could ultimately lead to stress fracture (Remodeling Loop). Paradoxically, the same strains from mechanical loading stimulate an adaptive bone formation modeling response that can increase bone stiffness in a manner that improves the fatigue resistance of bone and therefore may reduce risk of stress fractures (Modeling Loop).

Over time, osteoblast activity at the remodeling site promotes deposition of new bone to replace fatigue-damaged tissue (Figure 1, Remodeling Loop).^21,22 However, mineralization of the newly deposited matrix occurs gradually, spanning weeks to months.²³ Thus, the initial increase in porosity can result in stress concentrations and decreased bone stiffness and strength^24,25 requiring months to a year until mechanical competence is restored (Figure 1, Remodeling Loop).²⁶

Hence, the bone remodeling response to exercise is perplexing in that it is necessary to prevent stress fractures through microdamage repair, but also promotes stress fracture by leaving bones more porous and at a mechanical disadvantage, at least transiently.²⁷ Because of the important role remodeling plays in replacing fatigue damage with healthy bone, solutions for stress fracture prevention could focus on not only preventing generation and accrual of fatigue damage, but also on promoting the other mechanoadaptive response to exercise – bone modeling.

The role of modeling in the pathophysiology of stress fractures

Fortunately, the same strains that induce microdamage can simultaneously promote adaptive bone formation modeling (Figure 1, Modeling Loop). Mechanical loading sensed by osteocytes initiates this protective modeling response. Osteocytes translate mechanical stimuli into biochemical signals that alter gene and protein expression in response to loading.^13,28
–30 Perturbation of the osteocyte by direct strain or fluid flow shear stress during mechanical loading initiates intracellular calcium signaling and the secretion of pro-osteoblastic paracrine factors including prostaglandins, nitric oxide, insulin-like growth factor 1, and adenosine triphosphate.^31,32 Mechanical loading of osteocytes also suppresses secretion of negative regulators of bone formation, including sclerostin and dickkopf-1.^33,34 Osteocyte secretion of pro-osteoblastic factors and suppression of inhibitors of bone formation promote the osteoblast recruitment, proliferation, and differentiation necessary to stimulate bone formation (Figure 1, Modeling Loop).³⁵ This adaptive bone formation in response to heightened mechanical loading occurs as a result of osteoblast activity uncoupled from osteoclast activity^1,36 and is therefore a bone modeling response.¹

De novo bone formation can occur on all surfaces of the bone, including trabecular, endocortical, and periosteal surfaces. In trabecular bone, mechanical loading has been shown to increase the thickness of existing trabecular elements.^2,36 However, Increases in cortical thickness through formation at the diaphysis of long bones on the periosteal surfaces provide the greatest mechanical advantage.^37
–40 This periosteal formation results in increased second moment of inertia (i.e., wider bones) and reduces subsequent strain, to promote bone that is likely more resistant to fatigue⁴¹ and therefore less likely to incur a stress fracture.^6,42
–45 In bone formation modeling, because formation occurs without prior resorption, a positive adaptive bone response can occur in a relatively short period.⁴⁶ For instance, in military recruits, appreciable bone formation following novel physical training can be observed in as little as 8 weeks.⁴⁷

In summary, remodeling can be stimulated as a repair response that, although it can take months to a full year to complete, is necessary for replacing fatigue damage accrued with repetitive mechanical loading. While remodeling results in resorption in the short term, the final result of remodeling stimulated by fatigue damage repair is often no change in bone mass overall in healthy young people. By preventing accumulation of fatigue damage, this process is likely critical for maintaining the long-term health of the bone. Formation modeling, on the other hand, is the primary mechanoadaptive response of bone to exercise that confers substantial mechanical benefits that will then ideally prevent the generation of fatigue damage in the first place during exercise in the future, once the adaptation of the bone is fully completed. Stress fracture prevention strategies should leverage both of these physiologic pathways.

Practical implications for stress fracture prevention

Given the substantial time necessary to complete both remodeling and formation modeling, a practical implication of the model is that exercise conditioning regimens should be initiated as early as possible before high-risk periods for stress fractures to allow for both adaptive processes to conclude. For example, once a civilian has enlisted in the military, physical conditioning may only be protective from stress fracture if begun early enough to result in anabolic bone formation and conclusion of targeted remodeling. Other strategies for exercise prescription to offset risk of stress fracture include minimizing remodeling by limiting exercises with characteristics that promote accrual of fatigue damage and emphasizing exercises with characteristics that promote adaptive bone formation modeling.

Limiting exercise characteristics that promote accrual of fatigue damage

Avoiding fatigue damage is a straightforward way to prevent the positive feedback loop of targeted remodeling (Figure 2). As reviewed, physiological strains generated during mechanical loading cause fatigue damage.^27,49 Besides the magnitude of strain, the rate at which peak strains are achieved, or strain rate, can also influence the generation of microdamage.⁵⁰ Strain magnitudes and rates are inherently linked during physical activity. For example, higher peak tibial bone strain magnitudes and rates are associated with running (~900 µε compressive strain magnitude, ~27,000 µε/sec compressive strain rate) compared with walking (~550 µε compressive strain magnitude, ~7,000 µε/s compressive strain rate).⁵¹ In turn, higher strain characteristics, especially strain rates, result in greater accumulation of microdamage and loss of bone stiffness.⁵⁰ From a practical standpoint, these observations suggest that higher intensity, dynamic exercises, such as zigzag, up and down hill running,⁵¹ may lead to a greater amount of microdamage accrual than lower intensity and less dynamic exercises.

Figure 2.

Implications of the mechanical loading paradox: Only the first few cycles of exercise result in an adaptive bone formation response. Continued exercise and increasing exposure to repetitive loading may not add benefits and can induce microdamage and increase risk of stress fracture. Accordingly, the practical implication is that truncating the duration of exercise may inhibit this positive feedback loop that can lead to stress fracture while still preserving the positive adaptive bone formation response.

An important exercise characteristic that could be a key target for stress fracture prevention is the cumulative cycles of loading and overall duration of the exercise bout (Figure 2). Low strain magnitudes such as those that occur during habitual physical activity can also result in appreciable accumulation of fatigue damage and loss of bone stiffness.^50,52 This suggests that longer durations of low intensity exercise may have mechanical consequences in terms of fatigue damage accrual. Limiting the duration of exercise may be advantageous for attenuating fatigue damage in part because muscular fatigue with long-duration exercise increases the strain magnitudes and rates experienced during exercise.^49,53 In one study, strain magnitudes increased by 26% following a 2 km run and by 29% during a 40 km march, while strain rates increased by 13% after the run and 17% after the march.⁵³ These higher strain magnitudes coupled with long duration exercise may lead to further accrual of fatigue damage.

The concept of limiting exposure to long-duration exercise to reduce microdamage accrual holds relevance for military recruits, who have traditionally been exposed to substantial amounts of repetitive loading. In recruits from the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF), who suffered rates of stress fracture as high as 30%, it was estimated that by the fourth week of initial military training when stress fracture incidence was highest, the recruits had already walked, marched, or ran a total of 250 miles, or approximately 210,000 loading cycles.⁵⁴ When the IDF implemented new training requirements that promoted adequate sleep and lowered the cumulative marching distance allowed during training, stress fracture incidence decreased by 60%.⁵⁵ While the relative contribution of limiting the amount of marching cannot be separated from that of the sleep intervention, these results provide evidence that reducing the cumulative amount of repetitive loading exercises may reduce the incidence of stress fracture during times of heightened risk.

The potential benefits of lowering risk of stress fracture from limiting long duration repetitive loading must be balanced with consideration of the benefits of endurance training on cardiorespiratory fitness and self-efficacy^56,57 – both of which may be important benefits in relatively new Soldiers. One potential solution to this problem may be to increase endurance in new recruits more slowly over the course of the first year rather than doing so more rapidly during initial military training. Alternatively, if aerobic conditioning exercises are introduced far enough in advance to initial military training to allow for completion of skeletal adaptation, then bones loaded during military training may be able to endure long duration exercises without being susceptible to stress fracture.

Maximizing exercise characteristics that promote adaptive bone formation modeling

In yet another paradox, some of the same exercise strain characteristics that promote microdamage are also important for promoting bone formation.^46,58 Specifically, high strain magnitudes and rates are considered common characteristics of osteogenic, or bone forming, exercises. For instance, animal studies have shown that strain magnitude and bone formation exhibit a positive linear relationship.^59,60 Other studies^61,62 have demonstrated that bones respond with formation in response to dynamic loads only, with resorption observed as a result of static loading,⁶² suggesting that strain rate is an important characteristic for inducing adaptive bone formation. Therefore, reducing strain magnitude and rate may not be an ideal strategy for stress fracture prevention because both characteristics are important for promoting increases in bone strength with exercise.

As reviewed, the conundrum that high strain magnitudes and rates can both introduce fatigue damage and result in adaptive bone formation might be solved by focusing instead on limiting exercise duration, particularly in the early stages of initial military training or at the beginning of a competitive athletic season. Such a strategy may not interfere with the osteogenic potential of exercise. This is because the osteogenic window is short, with the mechanosensitivity of bone decreasing appreciably after only a few loading cycles.^63
–65 For example, an animal study demonstrated that 10 jumps per day over 8 weeks was nearly as osteogenic as 20 and 40 jumps per day, suggesting that the osteogenic potential decreases rapidly after exercise is initiated.⁶³ However, sensitivity of bone to exercise appears to be restored with limited recovery time.⁶⁶ Recovery periods as little as 14 s, and up to 8h, were shown to restore bone mechanosensitivity, and segmenting total exercise into discrete bouts improved the bone formation response to exercise in two rodent studies.^66,67 These studies suggest that short-duration exercises and exercise with frequent rest periods may be important strategies for stress fracture prevention.

Besides limiting duration of repetitive exercise, participation in sports that involve multidirectional cutting movements and numerous accelerations and decelerations such as seen in ball sports like basketball, soccer, and volleyball, may confer benefits from adaptive bone formation modeling. Young adult women who participated in at least 2 years of recreational soccer were shown to have 19% greater estimates of breaking strength at the tibial diaphysis and 20–40% lower estimated strain magnitudes and strain rates during walking with load carriage compared with healthy controls.^68,69 These studies suggest that exercises that include multidirectional loading hold promise for stress fracture prevention. This concept is supported by studies in the IDF, reporting reductions of over 50% in incidence of stress fractures in recruits who played ball sports in the 2 years leading up to initial military training relative to those who did not play ball sports.⁷⁰

Taken together, these studies in animals and humans collectively support the notion that to promote adaptive bone formation modeling and minimize fatigue damage, exercise should be as short in duration as practical, include recovery periods, and involve moderate-to-high intensity dynamic and multidirectional activities. While these concepts still require further prospective studies in humans to refine exercise guidelines, coaches and military leaders may want to apply these practical implications when designing conditioning regimens, particularly for individuals at high risk for stress fracture.

Summary

There are several paradoxes within the physiologic responses of bone to exercise, including that exercise promotes both a bone resorption response and a formation response. This phenomenon can be explained by the dual processes of bone targeted remodeling and formation modeling. Remodeling is necessary to repair fatigue damage generated during mechanical loading, and formation modeling is an efficient mechanism for improving bone stiffness and strength. Another perplexing observation is that bone remodeling may play a role in both stress fracture promotion and prevention through temporarily increasing porosity and repairing tissue damage, respectively. The practical significance of unraveling these paradoxes is that fatigue damage generation and accrual should be minimized to prevent the need for remodeling. This can be accomplished by avoiding rapid increases in training volume and limiting duration of training bouts, when possible, particularly during times of heightened risk for stress fracture. A final paradox is that moderate-to-high intensity and dynamic exercises generate fatigue damage but are also necessary to induce osteogenesis. The practical significance of these observations are that moderate-to-high intensity and dynamic exercises, particularly those that include multidirectional movements, should be included in conditioning programs to induce osteogenesis and extend the fatigue life of the bone. However, the duration of these exercises should be limited and rest periods included when practical. Appreciating the distinct physiologic pathways that underlie the responses of bone to exercise not only clarifies seemingly perplexing observations but also reveals straightforward, practical solutions for stress fracture prevention.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

Research supports in part by appointments to the Postgraduate Research Participation Program funded by USARIEM and administered by Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Engineering (CMC and KLP). We would also like to acknowledge Dr Stefan Pasiakos for his thoughtful review.

Authors’ Contributions

All authors participated in the conceptual development and writing of the paper. CMC, JMH, and KIG contributed to the figure design.

Disclaimer

The opinions and assertions contained herein are the private views of the authors and are not to be construed as official or as reflecting the views of the US Army or of the US Department of Defense.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Colleen M Castellani

Julie M Hughes

References

Barak

MM.

Bone modeling or bone remodeling: that is the question.

Am J Phys Anthropol 2020;172:153–5

Barak

Lieberman

Hublin

JJ.

A Wolff in sheep’s clothing: trabecular bone adaptation in response to changes in joint loading orientation.

Bone 2011;49:1141–51

Lieberman

Pearson

Polk

Demes

Crompton

AW.

Optimization of bone growth and remodeling in response to loading in tapered mammalian limbs.

J Exp Biol 2003;206:3125–38

Hughes

Castellani

Popp

Guerriere

Matheny

Jr Nindl

Bouxsein

ML.

The central role of osteocytes in the four adaptive pathways of bone’s mechanostat.

Exerc Sport Sci Rev 2020;48:140–8

Waterman

Gun

Bader

Orr

Belmont

Jr.

Epidemiology of lower extremity stress fractures in the United States military.

Mil Med 2016;181:1308–13

Cosman

Ruffing

Zion

Uhorchak

Ralston

Tendy

McGuigan

Lindsay

Nieves

Determinants of stress fracture risk in United States Military Academy cadets.

Bone 2013;55:359–66

Rizzone

Ackerman

Roos

Dompier

Kerr

ZY.

The epidemiology of stress fractures in collegiate student-athletes, 2004-2005 through 2013-2014 academic years.

J Athl Train 2017;52:966–75

Wood

Porter

Lower limb stress fractures in military training.

J R Nav Med Serv 2015;101:182–5

Kardouni

McKinnon

Taylor

Hughes

JM.

Timing of stress fracture in soldiers during the first 6 career months: a retrospective cohort study.

J Athl Train 2021;56:1278–84

10.

Bennell

Malcolm

Thomas

Wark

Brukner

PD.

The incidence and distribution of stress fractures in competitive track and field athletes. A twelve-month prospective study.

Am J Sports Med 1996;24:211–7

11.

Seref-Ferlengez

Kennedy

Schaffler

MB.

Bone microdamage, remodeling and bone fragility: how much damage is too much damage?

Bonekey Rep 2015;4:644

12.

Martin

Stover

Gibson

Gibeling

Griffin

LV.

In vitro fatigue behavior of the equine third metacarpus: remodeling and microcrack damage analysis.

J Orthop Res 1996;14:794–801

13.

Bonewald

Johnson

ML.

Osteocytes, mechanosensing and Wnt signaling.

Bone 2008;42:606–15

14.

Herman

Cardoso

Majeska

Jepsen

Schaffler

MB.

Activation of bone remodeling after fatigue: differential response to linear microcracks and diffuse damage.

Bone 2010;47:766–72

15.

Parfitt

AM.

Targeted and nontargeted bone remodeling: relationship to basic multicellular unit origination and progression.

Bone 2002;30:5–7

16.

Verborgt

Gibson

Schaffler

MB.

Loss of osteocyte integrity in association with microdamage and bone remodeling after fatigue in vivo.

J Bone Miner Res 2000;15:60–7

17.

Bentolila

Boyce

Fyhrie

Drumb

Skerry

Schaffler

MB.

Intracortical remodeling in adult rat long bones after fatigue loading.

Bone 1998;23:275–81

18.

Noble

Peet

Stevens

Brabbs

Mosley

Reilly

Reeve

Skerry

Lanyon

LE.

Mechanical loading: biphasic osteocyte survival and targeting of osteoclasts for bone destruction in rat cortical bone.

Am J Physiol Cell Physiol 2003;284:C934–43

19.

Kennedy

Laudier

Majeska

Sun

Schaffler

MB.

Osteocyte apoptosis is required for production of osteoclastogenic signals following bone fatigue in vivo.

Bone 2014;64:132–7

20.

Xiong

Piemontese

Onal

Campbell

Goellner

Dusevich

Bonewald

Manolagas

O’Brien

CA.

Osteocytes, not osteoblasts or lining cells, are the main source of the RANKL required for osteoclast formation in remodeling bone.

PLoS ONE 2015;10:e0138189

21.

Colopy

Benz-Dean

Barrett

Sample

Danova

Kalscheur

Vanderby

Jr Markel

Muir

Response of the osteocyte syncytium adjacent to and distant from linear microcracks during adaptation to cyclic fatigue loading.

Bone 2004;35:881–91

22.

Burr

DB.

Targeted and nontargeted remodeling.

Bone 2002;30:2–4

23.

Fuchs

Allen

Ruppel

Diab

Phipps

Miller

Burr

DB.

In situ examination of the time-course for secondary mineralization of Haversian bone using synchrotron Fourier transform infrared microspectroscopy.

Matrix Biol 2008;27:34–41

24.

Heaney

RP.

The bone-remodeling transient: implications for the interpretation of clinical studies of bone mass change.

J Bone Miner Res 1994; 9:1515–23

25.

Burr

DB.

Stress concentrations and bone microdamage: John Currey’s contributions to understanding the initiation and arrest of cracks in bone.

Bone 2019;127:517–25

26.

Taylor

Kuiper

JH.

The prediction of stress fractures using a “stressed volume” concept.

J Orthop Res 2001;19:919–26

27.

Schaffler

MB.

Bone fatigue and remodeling in the development of stress fractures. In: Burr

Milgrom

(eds) Musculoskeletal fatigue and stress fractures. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2001, pp.161–82

28.

Uda

Azab

Sun

Shi

Pajevic

PD.

Osteocyte mechanobiology.

Curr Osteoporos Rep 2017;15:318–25

29.

Dallas

Prideaux

Bonewald

. The osteocyte: an endocrine cell . . . and more. Endocr Rev 2013;34:658–90

30.

Bonewald

LF.

The amazing osteocyte.

J Bone Miner Res 2011;26:229–38

31.

Genetos

Kephart

Zhang

Yellowley

Donahue

HJ.

Oscillating fluid flow activation of gap junction hemichannels induces ATP release from MLO-Y4 osteocytes.

J Cell Physiol 2007;212:207–14

32.

Pathak

Bravenboer

Luyten

Verschueren

Lems

Klein-Nulend

Bakker

AD.

Mechanical loading reduces inflammation-induced human osteocyte-to-osteoclast communication.

Calcif Tissue Int 2015;97:169–78

33.

Robling

Niziolek

Baldridge

Condon

Allen

Alam

Mantila

Gluhak-Heinrich

Bellido

Harris

Turner

CH.

Mechanical stimulation of bone in vivo reduces osteocyte expression of Sost/sclerostin.

J Biol Chem 2008;283:5866–75

34.

Lara-Castillo

Kim-Weroha

Kamel

Javaheri

Ellies

Krumlauf

Thiagarajan

Johnson

ML.

In vivo mechanical loading rapidly activates beta-catenin signaling in osteocytes through a prostaglandin mediated mechanism.

Bone 2015;76:58–66

35.

Brady

O’Brien

Hoey

DA.

Mechanically stimulated bone cells secrete paracrine factors that regulate osteoprogenitor recruitment, proliferation, and differentiation.

Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2015; 459:118–23

36.

Birkhold

Razi

Duda

Weinkamer

Checa

Willie

BM.

The influence of age on adaptive bone formation and bone resorption.

Biomaterials 2014;35:9290–301

37.

Robling

Hinant

Burr

Turner

CH.

Improved bone structure and strength after long-term mechanical loading is greatest if loading is separated into short bouts.

J Bone Miner Res 2002;17:1545–54

38.

Macdonald

Cooper

McKay

HA.

Anterior-posterior bending strength at the tibial shaft increases with physical activity in boys: evidence for non-uniform geometric adaptation.

Osteoporos Int 2009;20:61–70

39.

Shaw

Stock

JT.

Extreme mobility in the Late Pleistocene? Comparing limb biomechanics among fossil Homo, varsity athletes and Holocene foragers.

J Hum Evol 2013;64:242–9

40.

Silva

Brodt

Lynch

Stephens

Wood

Civitelli

Tibial loading increases osteogenic gene expression and cortical bone volume in mature and middle-aged mice.

PLoS ONE 2012;7:e34980

41.

Warden

Hurst

Sanders

Turner

Burr

Bone adaptation to a mechanical loading program significantly increases skeletal fatigue resistance.

J Bone Miner Res 2005;20:809–16

42.

Beck

Ruff

Shaffer

Betsinger

Trone

Brodine

SK.

Stress fracture in military recruits: gender differences in muscle and bone susceptibility factors.

Bone 2000;27:437–44

43.

Popp

Hughes

Smock

Novotny

Stovitz

Koehler

Petit

MA.

Bone geometry, strength, and muscle size in runners with a history of stress fracture.

Med Sci Sports Exerc 2009;41:2145–50

44.

Schnackenburg

Macdonald

Ferber

Wiley

Boyd

SK.

Bone quality and muscle strength in female athletes with lower limb stress fractures.

Med Sci Sports Exerc 2011;43:2110–9

45.

Jepsen

Evans

Negus

Gagnier

Centi

Erlich

Hadid

Yanovich

Moran

DS.

Variation in tibial functionality and fracture susceptibility among healthy, young adults arises from the acquisition of biologically distinct sets of traits.

J Bone Miner Res 2013;28: 1290–300

46.

Holguin

Brodt

Sanchez

Kotiya

Silva

MJ.

Adaptation of tibial structure and strength to axial compression depends on loading history in both C57BL/6 and BALB/c mice.

Calcif Tissue Int 2013;93:211–21

47.

Hughes

Gaffney-Stomberg

Guerriere

Taylor

Popp

Unnikrishnan

Staab

Matheny

Jr McClung

JP.

Changes in tibial bone microarchitecture in female recruits in response to 8 weeks of U.S. Army Basic Combat Training.

Bone 2018; 113:9–16

48.

Hughes

Popp

Yanovich

Bouxsein

Matheny

Jr . The role of adaptive bone formation in the etiology of stress fracture. Exp Biol Med 2017;242:897–906

49.

Fyhrie

Milgrom

Hoshaw

Simkin

Dar

Drumb

Burr

DB.

Effect of fatiguing exercise on longitudinal bone strain as related to stress fracture in humans.

Ann Biomed Eng 1998;26:660–5

50.

Schaffler

Radin

Burr

DB.

Mechanical and morphological effects of strain rate on fatigue of compact bone.

Bone 1989;10:207–14

51.

Burr

Milgrom

Fyhrie

Forwood

Nyska

Finestone

Hoshaw

Saiag

Simkin

In vivo measurement of human tibial strains during vigorous activity.

Bone 1996;18:405–10

52.

Schaffler

Radin

Burr

DB.

Long-term fatigue behavior of compact bone at low strain magnitude and rate.

Bone 1990;11:321–6

53.

Milgrom

Radeva-Petrova

Finestone

Nyska

Mendelson

Benjuya

Simkin

Burr

The effect of muscle fatigue on in vivo tibial strains.

J Biomech 2007;40:845–50

54.

Milgrom

Giladi

Chisin

Dizian

The long-term followup of soldiers with stress fractures.

Am J Sports Med 1985;13:398–400

55.

Finestone

Milgrom

How stress fracture incidence was lowered in the Israeli army: a 25-yr struggle.

Med Sci Sports Exerc 2008;40: S623–9

56.

McAuley

Blissmer

Self-efficacy determinants and consequences of physical activity.

Exerc Sport Sci Rev 2000;28:85–8

57.

Kapoor

Chauhan

Singh

Malhotra

Chahal

Physical activity for health and fitness: past, present and future.

J Lifestyle Med 2022;12:9–14

58.

Turner

Akhter

Raab

Kimmel

Recker

RR.

A noninvasive, in vivo model for studying strain adaptive bone modeling.

Bone 1991;12:73–9

59.

Rubin

Lanyon

LE.

Regulation of bone mass by mechanical strain magnitude.

Calcif Tissue Int 1985;37:411–7

60.

Turner

Forwood

Rho

Yoshikawa

Mechanical loading thresholds for lamellar and woven bone formation.

J Bone Miner Res 1994;9:87–97

61.

Hert

Lisková

Landrgot

Influence of the long-term, continuous bending on the bone. An experimental study on the tibia of the rabbit.

Folia Morphol 1969;17:389–99

62.

Lanyon

Rubin

CT.

Static vs dynamic loads as an influence on bone remodelling.

J Biomech 1984;17:897–905

63.

Umemura

Ishiko

Yamauchi

Kurono

Mashiko

Five jumps per day increase bone mass and breaking force in rats.

J Bone Miner Res 1997;12:1480–5

64.

Saxon

Robling

Alam

Turner

CH.

Mechanosensitivity of the rat skeleton decreases after a long period of loading, but is improved with time off.

Bone 2005;36:454–64

65.

Yang

Embry

Main

RP.

Effects of loading duration and short rest insertion on cancellous and cortical bone adaptation in the mouse tibia.

PLoS ONE 2017;12:e0169519

66.

Robling

Burr

Turner

CH.

Recovery periods restore mechanosensitivity to dynamically loaded bone.

J Exp Biol 2001;204:3389–99

67.

Robling

Hinant

Burr

Turner

CH.

Shorter, more frequent mechanical loading sessions enhance bone mass.

Med Sci Sports Exerc 2002;34:196–202

68.

Hughes

Dickin

Wang

The relationships between multiaxial loading history and tibial strains during load carriage.

J Sci Med Sport 2019;22:48–53

69.

Hughes

Dickin

Wang

Soccer participation is associated with benefits in tibial bone cross-sectional geometry and strength in young women.

J Sports Med Phys Fitness 2022;62:969–73

70.

Milgrom

Simkin

Eldad

Nyska

Finestone

Using bone’s adaptation ability to lower the incidence of stress fractures.

Am J Sports Med 2000;28:245–51