Quicker steps ease the impact on your joints
High confidence
Cadence is how many steps you take per minute. Bump it up 5 to 10 percent at the same speed, and your stride shortens and your knees and hips absorb less load with each step. It can feel a little awkward and harder at first.
Why it works
More steps mean a shorter stride. Your foot lands closer to your body's center of mass (the point you balance around), the knee bends less, and the thigh muscles that straighten the knee do less work, which lowers the load on the knee and kneecap. Pooled data show little change in the vertical impact force itself.
What it means in practice
If knee, shin, or hip pain shows up when you run, a 5-10% cadence bump set by a metronome or audio cue is worth trying. If you run pain-free, it's optional. There's no strong evidence that raising cadence helps runners who already feel comfortable.
The evidence
-
The 10 included studies gave consistent evidence that raising stride rate (and shortening stride length to match at constant speed) lowered several biomechanical factors linked to running injury: center-of-mass vertical excursion, ground reaction force magnitude, shock attenuation demand, and energy absorbed at the hip, knee, and ankle. That direction held despite differences in study methods, from overground versus treadmill testing to self-selected versus fixed speeds. The review measures loading, not injury, so it shows that a higher cadence reduces these mechanical factors associated with injury, not that it prevents injury.
-
Raising cadence 5-10% consistently improved biomechanics across the reviewed studies: lower vertical ground reaction forces, reduced loading rates, shorter stride length, better knee and hip alignment, and a more favorable joint loading distribution. An 8-week 10% intervention (Allen 2016) shifted most runners from rearfoot to midfoot or forefoot strike and cut initial impact forces. These changes tracked with fewer overuse injuries, chiefly patellofemoral pain, tibial stress fractures, and medial tibial stress syndrome. The review concludes cadence retraining appears to be a low-cost, effective way to improve running mechanics and potentially reduce overuse injuries, but notes that most studies report surrogate biomechanical outcomes and calls for longer prospective studies to confirm injury benefits.
n=18
-
Both gait retraining programs cut running pain more than no intervention at 6 months (impact vs control: -3.2 NRS, 95% CI -5.1 to -1.3, p=0.001; cadence vs control: -2.9 NRS, p=0.002). The impact group also improved knee function right after the 2-week program (+10.8, 95% CI 1.0-20.6, p=0.027). Usual pain and lower-limb kinematics did not differ between groups, so the mechanism stays unclear. The trial is small (n=30); the assessor was blinded, but participants and the gait-retraining researcher were not.
n=30
-
At a fixed 12 km/h, raising cadence 10% (C1) cut rearfoot peak force by 81 N and shortened stride by 17 cm; orthoses alone (C2) reduced rearfoot peak force by 41 N without changing stride. Low-drop shoes (C3) dropped rearfoot peak force by 72 N but increased rearfoot contact time by 1.89 ms. Combining all three (C4) drove the largest changes: rearfoot peak force fell 139 N, forefoot peak force fell 183 N, and midfoot contact time rose 5.07 ms. Table 2 reports p<0.001 for all parameters, with Cohen's d from 0.35 (C1 forefoot contact time) to 1.21 (C4 forefoot peak force); the paper's abstract swaps the C4 rearfoot and forefoot values and describes the C3 contact-time change as a decrease, contradicting its own table. This single acute treadmill session in 23 runners maps force redistribution, not injury or training outcomes.
n=23
-
Increasing step rate reduced peak knee flexion (strong evidence), step length, peak hip adduction and peak knee extensor moment (moderate evidence), and braking impulse, peak patellofemoral joint stress and negative hip and knee work (limited evidence). Pooled data gave limited evidence that increasing step rate does not change peak vertical ground reaction force or vertical loading rates. Very limited evidence suggested higher perceived exertion and metabolic cost when step rate is changed, and pain and function improved in two small studies of runners with patellofemoral pain. Most studies were immediate effects only.
-
Grouped technique changes including increased step rate, shorter step length and forefoot strike decreased patellofemoral contact force (SMD -0.60) and stress (SMD -0.59). Decreased step rate and longer steps increased patellofemoral load. The pooled estimates combine several technique changes in one subgroup, so step rate is not isolated.
Why we call confidence high
Three systematic reviews converge on joint loads. Anderson's 2022 meta-analysis of 37 studies finds a higher step rate lowers knee extensor moment (moderate evidence) and patellofemoral stress and knee and hip work (limited evidence), Yu's 2026 meta-analysis finds higher step rate among the technique changes that lower patellofemoral load, and Schubert 2014 finds lower ground reaction force and joint energy absorption. Figueiredo 2025 (18 studies) reports lower knee and hip loads with 5-10% increases. Anderson's pooled data show no clear change in vertical loading rate. Junior 2024 found cadence retraining reduced knee pain in runners with patellofemoral pain without measuring loads, and Nicolas-Peyrot 2025 found lower rearfoot plantar force in one session.
Where it applies
Adult recreational and trained runners, especially anyone with current or prior running-related knee or shin pain.
Does not apply to: runners without symptoms whose current cadence already exceeds 175-180 spm at typical training paces.
Last reviewed Oct 14, 2026. See how we score.