Advances in Badminton Footwear Design: A Systematic Review of Biomechanical and Performance Implications

Featured Application

This systematic review provides biomechanical evidence that can guide the design of badminton footwear to enhance athletic performance and reduce injury risk. The findings may be applied by sports shoe manufacturers, coaches, and sports medicine professionals to develop evidence-based, sport-specific footwear and training recommendations.

Abstract

This systematic review, registered in PROSPERO (CRD42025101243), aimed to evaluate how specific badminton shoe design features influence lower-limb biomechanics, injury risk, and sport-specific performance. A comprehensive search in six databases yielded 445 studies, from which 10 met inclusion criteria after duplicate removal and eligibility screening. The reviewed studies focused on modifications involving forefoot bending stiffness, torsional stiffness, lateral-wedge hardness, insole and midsole hardness, sole structure, and heel curvature. The most consistent biomechanical benefits were associated with moderate levels of forefoot and torsional stiffness (e.g., 60D) and rounded heel designs. Increased forefoot bending stiffness was associated with reduced foot torsion and knee loading during forward lunges. Torsional stiffness around 60D provided favorable ankle support and reduced knee abduction, suggesting potential protection against ligament strain. Rounded heels reduced vertical impact forces and promoted smoother knee–ankle coordination, especially in experienced athletes. Lateral-wedge designs improved movement efficiency by reducing contact time and enhancing joint stiffness. Harder midsoles, however, resulted in increased impact forces upon landing. Excessive stiffness in any component may restrict joint mobility and responsiveness. Studies included 127 male-dominated (aged 18–28) competitive athletes, assessing kinematics, impact forces, and coordination during sport-specific tasks. The reviewed studies predominantly involved male participants, with little attention to sex-specific biomechanical differences such as joint alignment and foot structure. Differences in testing methods and movement tasks further limited direct comparisons. Future research should explore real-game biomechanics, include diverse athlete populations, and investigate long-term adaptations. These efforts will contribute to the development of performance-enhancing, injury-reducing badminton shoes tailored to the unique demands of the sport.

1. Introduction

Badminton is one of the most globally practiced racket sports, with over 200 million participants worldwide [1]. Its inclusion in the 1992 Olympic Games significantly elevated its competitive profile, contributing to a steady rise in both amateur and professional players [2]. As a physically demanding sport, badminton is characterized by rapid multidirectional movements, explosive jumps, and frequent direction changes, all of which place substantial stress on the lower extremities [3]. Epidemiological studies indicate that 58–92.3% of injuries in badminton occur in the lower limbs, primarily affecting the knee and ankle joints [4]. The sport’s high physical demands, with peak heart rates reaching 190.5 beats/min and an average of 173.5 beats/min over a 28 min match duration, further emphasize the need for effective injury prevention strategies [5]. Given the intense nature of badminton footwork, footwear design must optimize shock absorption, energy return, and stability to reduce excessive loading on the lower limbs and mitigate injury risk.

Benno et al. [6] divide the development of sport shoes into three stages: the past, the present, and the future. Research on some sports, including badminton, only began to emerge during the later part of the present stage. With the development of sports science and the broad use of and research on shoes in sport field, badminton shoes gradually became attractive to sport scientists, especially movement scientists [6,7]. Proper footwear is particularly crucial for competitive badminton players, who rely on precise foot placement, dynamic balance, and efficient movement execution to reach the shuttlecock and maintain stability during rapid exchanges [8,9]. While rigorous training plays a fundamental role in performance, appropriate shoe design enhances biomechanical efficiency, supporting foot stability while reducing excessive joint loading. Research has established that footwear design parameters influence lower-limb biomechanics, affecting joint stability, energy transfer efficiency, and injury susceptibility [7]. Key features such as forefoot bending stiffness (resistance to metatarsophalangeal joint flexion), torsional rigidity (a shoe’s resistance to longitudinal axis rotation, critical for ankle stability during multidirectional movements), lateral-wedge hardness (stiffness of the midsole’s lateral margin), midsole hardness, and heel curvature are known to modulate shock attenuation, movement coordination, and ground reaction forces (GRFs) [10,11,12]. For instance, increased forefoot bending stiffness has been shown to reduce foot torsional motion and knee adduction, potentially lowering the risk of medial knee loading injuries [10]. Similarly, moderate torsional stiffness optimizes ankle stability, reducing knee abduction angles during sidestep cutting, which is crucial for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury prevention [11].

Despite extensive research on footwear biomechanics in sports such as running and basketball, badminton-specific shoe modifications remain relatively underexplored. Bouché [13] identified key functionalities of general court shoes, including pronation control, adequate cushioning, and optimal traction. However, badminton shoes require additional optimizations to accommodate the sport’s unique demands, such as rapid directional changes, high-impact landings, and explosive acceleration [2]. These requirements indicate that badminton footwear must be further specialized beyond traditional court shoe designs to provide enhanced stability, injury protection, and energy return. Additionally, the interactions between different shoe design elements, such as midsole thickness and forefoot bending stiffness, are still not fully understood, emphasizing the need for further biomechanical research [14].

Gender-specific differences in badminton footwear requirements also warrant greater attention. Research has shown that women prioritize forefoot cushioning, breathability, and shoe fit, whereas men report concerns regarding excessive arch support [15]. Due to anatomical differences such as narrower heels, higher arches, and greater knee valgus angles, female athletes may experience higher forefoot pressure and increased risk of hallux valgus injuries if shoes are not appropriately designed for their foot structure. However, most commercial women’s badminton shoes are scaled-down versions of men’s models, which may not adequately address sex-specific biomechanical needs. These findings highlight the need for gender-specific optimizations in badminton shoe design to improve both performance and injury prevention.

This systematic review aims to consolidate evidence on how badminton shoe design modifications influence lower-limb biomechanics, injury risks, and sport-specific performance. By evaluating studies on forefoot bending stiffness, torsional rigidity, midsole hardness, and heel modifications, we hypothesize that optimal shoe configurations can enhance stability, improve energy return, and reduce injury prevalence. Findings from this review will provide scientific guidance for footwear designers, coaches, and athletes, advancing the development of biomechanically informed badminton shoes tailored to the sport’s unique demands. Additionally, this review will identify current research gaps and propose future research directions, aiming to enhance footwear customization strategies and long-term athlete safety.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Protocol Registration

This review follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, and the protocol has been registered in PROSPERO (Registration No. CRD42025101243).

2.2. Search Strategy

A standardized electronic literature search strategy was conducted across six databases—Google Scholar, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science—covering studies published between 2009 and September 2024. The search strategy applied Boolean operators and MeSH terms where applicable, using the following keyword combination: (‘Badminton’ AND (‘biomechanics’ OR ‘kinetics’ OR ‘kinematics’) AND (‘shoe’ OR ‘shoes’ OR ‘footwear’) AND (‘midsole’ OR ‘shoe heel’ OR ‘sole’ OR ‘insole’ OR ‘stiffness’ OR ‘torsional stiffness’ OR ‘lateral-wedge hardness’ OR ‘shoe last’ OR ‘toe wedge’ OR ‘heel to toe drop’ OR ‘foot morphology’ OR ‘cushioning’ OR ‘energy return’)).

In addition to database searches, manual screening of reference lists from relevant journals, including Footwear Science, was performed to identify additional studies that met the inclusion criteria.

The selection of 2009 as the starting point was based on significant advancements in sports footwear technology, particularly in midsole cushioning, gender-specific designs, and biomechanical testing methodologies. Older studies may not reflect contemporary badminton shoe designs and were therefore excluded. For this revision, the search was extended to May 2025 to include the latest advancements, ensuring the review reflects state-of-the-art research.

The study selection process adhered to PRISMA guidelines and is illustrated in Figure 1.

A total of 445 records were identified through database searches. After removing 33 duplicates, 412 records were screened by title and abstract. Of these, 363 were excluded due to irrelevance or methodological issues. The full texts of 15 articles were assessed for eligibility, and 10 studies were included in the final analysis.

Given that most existing studies focus on male athletes, this review did not exclude studies based on gender. However, considering the biomechanical disparities in foot morphology, load distribution, and movement strategies between male and female players, the potential influence of gender differences on the interpretation of results was emphasized in the discussion. Future research should prioritize gender-balanced samples and sex-stratified biomechanical analyses to refine personalized footwear recommendations.

2.3. Eligibility Criteria

Studies included in this review met the following predefined eligibility criteria to ensure methodological rigor and relevance:

• Only original research articles published in peer-reviewed English-language journals were considered. Conference proceedings, review articles, case studies, and book chapters were excluded, as well as master’s or doctoral theses. Studies without full-text availability were also not included.
• Studies had to examine the effects of badminton shoe design on biomechanical performance and injury risk during sport-specific movements. Research had to focus on at least one of the following footwear parameters: forefoot bending stiffness, torsional stiffness, lateral-wedge hardness, midsole hardness, insole hardness, and shoe sole or heel design. Studies that investigated general footwear characteristics without addressing badminton-specific biomechanical demands were not considered.
• Methodologically, studies had to present quantitative biomechanical data related to joint kinematics, kinetics, ground reaction forces, or energy transfer. Statistical analyses had to be included, with numerical results provided for biomechanical changes associated with performance or injury risk. Studies lacking biomechanical relevance or statistical analyses were excluded.
• Although only studies published in English were included, this language restriction was applied based on scientific considerations. Most high-quality biomechanical research in this domain is published in English, and non-English studies often lack methodological transparency or accessible full texts. While this decision helped ensure the consistency and reliability of the included data, we acknowledge that excluding non-English studies may introduce language bias. Future systematic reviews should consider including multilingual sources to enhance comprehensiveness.

2.4. Identification of Papers

This systematic review primarily included laboratory-based biomechanical studies. To ensure methodological rigor and consistency in quality assessment, the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale was used to evaluate the study quality. The PEDro scale assesses methodological aspects such as participant randomization, blinding of outcome assessors, and completeness of data reporting. Studies with a PEDro score of ≥6 were classified as high quality. Inter-reviewer reliability for the PEDro scoring process was assessed using Cohen’s Kappa coefficient, with a threshold of ≥0.8 indicating excellent agreement.

Two independent reviewers (CZH, WZX) screened the titles and abstracts of all potentially relevant studies. To ensure reliability, Cohen’s Kappa coefficient was calculated to assess inter-rater agreement during the title/abstract screening phase, yielding a value of κ ≥ 0.8, indicating excellent consistency. Full-text articles meeting the preliminary inclusion criteria were further evaluated by both reviewers before a final decision on eligibility was made. In cases of disagreement regarding study quality or inclusion, the issue was resolved by consultation with the corresponding author (SSQ) (

Table 1. PEDro scores independently assessed by two reviewers.

Article	Q1		Q2		Q3		Q4		Q5		Q6		Q7		Q8		Q9		Q10		Total Score (Max = 10, Article Excluded When Score < 6)
	Random Allocation of Subjects		Allocation Was Concealed		Groups Were Similar at Baseline		Blind to Subjects		Blind to Therapists		Blind to Assessors		At Least 1 Key Outcome from 85% of Subjects		All Subjects Received Treatment or Control Condition		Between Group Comparisons Reported for at Least 1 Outcome		Provides at Least 1 Point of Measure (Effect Size and Variability)
	R1	R2	R1	R2	R1	R2	R1	R2	R1	R2	R1	R2	R1	R2	R1	R2	R1	R2	R1	R2	R1	R2	Final Score	Outcome Related to Modification
S. K. Park et al. (2017) [14]	1	1	0	0	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	6	6	6	forefoot bending stiffness
Shen et al. (2024) [11]	1	1	0	0	1	1	0	0	0	0	1	0	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	7	6	7	torsional stiffness
W. K. Lam, Ryue, et al. (2017) [16]	1	1	0	0	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	6	6	6	shoe heel
Ryue et al. (2013) [17]	1	1	0	0	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	6	6	6	shoe heel
Guanchun et al. (2021) [18]	1	1	0	0	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	6	6	6	shoe heel
Chen et al. (2023) [19]	1	1	0	0	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	6	6	6	lateral forefoot wedge sole
Yu et al. (2023) [12]	1	1	0	0	1	1	0	1	0	0	0	0	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	6	7	6	lateral wedge, hardness
S.-K. Park et al. (2013) [10]	1	1	0	0	1	1	0	0	1	0	0	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	7	7	7	forefoot bending stiffness
Lund et al. (2017) [20]	1	1	0	0	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	6	6	6	insole hardness
Y. J. Lin et al. (2022) [21]	1	1	0	0	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	6	6	6	midsole hardness

).

The key findings of the included studies are presented in

Table 2. Summary of the studies on shoe effect.

Reference	Shoe Conditions	Subject Info (Numbers, Sex, Age, Playing Level)	Testing Protocol	Outcome
				Injury-Related	Performance-Related	PEDro Score
S. K. Park et al. (2017) [14]	Bending stiffness (flexible, regular, stiff)	10 M, 19.7 y (1.6), competitive	Consecutive lunges in six directions, consecutive right forward lunges, comfort test	Shoe bending and torsion, peak excursion, and total ROM of shoe and ankle	NA	6
Shen et al. (2024) [11]	Shore D hardness (50D, 60D, 70D)	15 M, 22.8 (1.96), competitive	Forehand clear stroke (left and right foot), 45-degree sidestep cutting, consecutive vertical jumps	Ankle, knee, and MTP joint kinematics, GRF, joint ROM	60D: lower knee abduction angle and coronal motions, stance time	7
W. K. Lam, Ryue, et al. (2017) [16]	Rounded Heel Shoe (RHS), Flattened Heel Shoe (FHS), Standard Heel Shoe (SHS)	26 M, 20.6 (0.7), competitive	Five maximum lunge trials in left-forward direction	Shoe-ground kinematics, GRF, knee moments	Lower maximum vertical loading rate in RHS	6
Ryue et al. (2013) [17]	Rounded Heel Shoe, Standard Heel Shoe, Flattened Heel Shoe	11, M, competitive	Extreme lunges with maximal distance (−45 deg)	GRF, joint kinetics, and kinematics	RH: lower vertical impact force and loading rate; FH: higher mean loading rate	6
Guanchun et al. (2021) [18]	Rounded Heel Shoe, Flattened Heel Shoe, Standard Heel Shoe	11 M, 20.6 (0.7), competitive	Maximum-effort lunge toward in the left-forward direction (right leg)	Knee and ankle kinematics	RHS: better PA and CRP	6
Chen et al. (2023) [19]	Lateral forefoot wedge sole	15 F/M, 20.07 y (1.53), competitive	Lunge movements (forward, lateral, backward)	GRF ratio, contact time	Forefoot wedge sole: higher GRF v/h	6
Yu et al. (2023) [12]	Lateral-wedge Asker C: 55, 60, 65, 70	15 M, 26 (2.24), competitive	Lunges to the right forward and left forward, court and cross-step, sidestep	Stance time, joint stiffness	Contact times decreased; joint stiffness increased	6
S.-K. Park et al. (2013) [10]	Cutouts of outsole material at the major flexing grooves	10, M,19.7 (1.6), competitive	Forward lunges, high clears	Peak shoe bending motion, knee adduction, torsion	Lunges: stiff shoe, smaller torsion in left foot, increased knee adduction in right leg	7
Lund et al. (2017) [20]	Insole Asker C:35 48 60	14, M, 24.8 (7.7), competitive	Right forward lunges	Gastrocnemius loading	No significant differences	6
Y. J. Lin et al. (2022) [21]	Different midsole hardness (62C, 68C)	15, M. 21.6 (4.4), competitive	Scissor jumps	GRF variables	During landing: harder midsole = higher vertical impact peak	6

, which summarizes study objectives, sample size, primary biomechanical outcomes, and key statistical results.

3. Results and Discussion

A total of 445 studies were identified through the systematic database search (Figure 1). After removing 33 duplicates, 412 studies remained for title and abstract screening, resulting in the exclusion of 397 studies based on relevance and methodological criteria. Following a full-text evaluation of 15 studies, 10 studies met the eligibility criteria and were included in the final analysis.

The selected studies investigated various badminton shoe modifications (Table 2), with a focus on forefoot bending stiffness (n = 2), torsional stiffness (n = 1), lateral-wedge hardness (n = 1), insole hardness (n = 1), shoe sole design (n = 2), midsole hardness (n = 1), and shoe heel design (n = 2). The biomechanical assessments were conducted using badminton-specific movement tasks, including lunges (n = 8), high clear (n = 3), 45-degree sidestep cutting (n = 1), consecutive vertical jumps (n = 1), cross-step (n = 1), sidestep (n = 1), and takeoff and landing (n = 1).

A total of 127 participants were included across the studies, consisting of 112 males and 15 participants with unspecified gender. The mean age was 23 ± 5 years (range: 18–28 years), with all participants classified as competitive-level athletes. Reported shoe sizes primarily included US 9.0 (n = 3) and US 8.5 (n = 2), while five studies did not specify shoe size.

Participants with a history of lower extremity injuries were excluded based on different timeframes specified in the studies. One study excluded participants with injuries within the past 12 months, five studies excluded those with injuries within the past 6 months, and four studies did not specify the injury exclusion period.

3.1. Forefoot Bending Stiffness

Bending stiffness is the resistive force during metatarsophalangeal (MTP) joint flexion, and the unit of measurement can be Nm/degree, Nm/rad, or N/mm [22]. Forefoot bending stiffness (FBS) refers to the resistance of the forefoot region to flexion around a medio-lateral axis, incorporating both upper and midsole structural properties. In badminton, this characteristic plays a crucial role in controlling metatarsophalangeal (MTP) joint motion and distributing ground reaction forces (GRFs) during rapid directional changes. However, existing studies present inconsistent findings regarding its influence on performance and injury risk.

Park et al. [10] reported that increased FBS significantly reduced foot torsional range and knee adduction during forward lunges, suggesting a potential protective effect against excessive medial knee loading. However, in high clears, stiffer shoes led to increased knee adduction, indicating possible compensatory movement strategies. In contrast, Park et al. [14] tested a shoe with a full-length midsole that was 2 mm thinner while maintaining the same back-to-forefoot offset and found no significant differences in agility time, peak shoe torsion, bending angles, or total ankle joint motion during forward lunges.

These inconsistencies highlight the complex interactions between forefoot stiffness, midsole properties, and movement execution. While increased stiffness has been associated with reduced energy loss at the MTP joint [23], excessive stiffness may limit elastic energy storage and return, particularly in dynamic sports such as badminton [24]. Furthermore, the inclusion of high clears by Park et al. [10], a movement that engages MTP dorsiflexion more actively, may explain the observed torsional and knee adduction changes. In contrast, the non-significant findings by Park et al. [14] may be attributed to differences in study design, including midsole thickness, participant sample size, and the specific movement tasks assessed.

Beyond footwear characteristics, individual athlete variability plays a crucial role in movement biomechanics [25]. Differences in muscle strength, joint flexibility, skill execution, and movement strategies may significantly impact the effectiveness of footwear modifications. In high clears, for example, variations in hitting point height, swing speed, and directional control can alter lower-limb loading patterns, influencing how forefoot stiffness interacts with player mechanics [26]. Additionally, laboratory-based studies may not fully replicate real-game conditions, where fatigue, court surface compliance, and opponent positioning introduce additional biomechanical constraints.

The role of gender-specific biomechanics must also be considered. Women’s broader forefoot width, higher prevalence of hallux valgus, and distinct plantar pressure distribution suggest a potentially greater sensitivity to forefoot stiffness variations [15]. Additionally, greater knee valgus angles in female athletes may modulate FBS effects on lower-limb loading patterns, underscoring the need for gender-stratified research to refine footwear recommendations.

While current studies provide valuable insights, further investigations are needed to clarify the interplay between FBS, midsole rigidity, and other shoe parameters under game-replicating conditions. Advances in wearable motion capture systems, force-sensitive insoles, and AI-driven biomechanical modeling will enhance the ecological validity of future research. Moreover, incorporating longitudinal studies with elite and sub-elite athletes will offer deeper insights into the adaptive effects of FBS variations on movement efficiency and injury prevention.

3.2. Torsional Stiffness Effect

Torsional stiffness (TS) refers to a shoe’s resistance to rotation along its longitudinal axis, influencing foot and ankle kinematics during rapid multidirectional movements [11,23]. In badminton, TS plays a crucial role in determining ankle stability and the efficiency of lateral push-off maneuvers [10,11]. However, the optimal range of TS remains debated, as different studies report contrasting effects on movement performance and injury risk [27,28,29].

Shen et al. [11] examined how different levels of TS (50D, 60D, and 70D) influenced lower-limb biomechanics during forehand clear strokes, 45-degree sidestep cutting, and consecutive vertical jumps. Their findings indicate that higher TS (70D) significantly reduced peak ankle inversion angles during sidestep cutting compared with 50D and 60D shoes (p < 0.05), suggesting improved ankle joint stability. However, shoes with excessive TS (70D) constrained ankle dorsiflexion and reduced coronal knee ROM, potentially affecting movement flexibility.

In contrast, intermediate TS (60D) reduced knee abduction angles while optimizing stance time and lateral push-off efficiency. These findings suggest that moderate TS may strike a balance between stability and mobility, whereas excessive TS may restrict joint freedom, potentially influencing agility and movement control.

The reduction in ankle inversion angles with increased TS aligns with previous research suggesting that higher TS limits excessive foot eversion and inversion [30,31]. This stabilizing effect is particularly relevant for sidestep cutting movements, where excessive ankle inversion may increase lateral ligament stress and risk of ankle sprains [27]. However, excessive stiffness may also impair dorsiflexion, reduce shock absorption capacity, and potentially increase compensatory stress on the knee joint [32].

The biomechanical trade-off observed in TS optimization was further supported by Mei et al. [33], who reported that elite athletes demonstrate higher ankle eversion torque and medial plantar pressure during lunges. While higher TS may help control excessive inversion, restricting dorsiflexion could limit the foot’s natural loading response, affecting reactive movements such as high-clear recoveries.

The role of individual adaptation should also be considered. Elite players with stronger foot musculature may tolerate higher TS without compromising mobility, whereas less trained athletes may require lower TS for greater movement adaptability. Additionally, laboratory-based experiments may not fully capture real-game scenarios, where postural adjustments and fatigue influence ankle mechanics.

While these findings provide insights into TS’s role in badminton footwear design, further studies are needed to explore the long-term adaptation effects of TS, particularly under game-like conditions and across different athlete skill levels.

3.3. Lateral-Wedge Hardness Effect

Lateral stability, as a crucial biomechanical parameter in sports science, is defined as the capacity of the ankle complex to resist excessive pronation or inversion under dynamic loading conditions [12,34], with its primary function lying in the prevention of ankle injuries during directional changes [12,35]. This stability mechanism is intrinsically modulated by footwear design parameters, particularly lateral-wedge hardness, which refers to the stiffness of the lateral side of a shoe’s midsole, influencing foot–ground interaction during weight-bearing movements. In sports requiring frequent lateral shifts, such as badminton, this parameter affects foot stability, energy transfer, and impact attenuation. A harder lateral wedge is generally associated with reduced midsole deformation, potentially enhancing foot alignment and responsiveness during rapid directional changes [23,27,30]. However, excessive stiffness may restrict foot flexibility, alter joint loading patterns, and influence both performance and injury risk [27,30,31].

Yu et al. [12] investigated the effects of varying lateral-wedge hardness levels on lower-limb biomechanics during badminton-specific movements, including jump landing, cross-step, sidestep, and lunges. The study quantified joint kinematics and kinetics under different stiffness conditions, aiming to understand how changes in lateral-wedge hardness affect footwork mechanics and injury risk. The results showed that increased lateral-wedge hardness shortened contact times by 8.9–13.5% and increased joint stiffness in the foot–ankle complex during sidestep maneuvers, suggesting improved stability and agility. Time-varying differences were noted in the initial landing and push-off phases of cross- and sidesteps, as well as in the drive-off phase of lunges, indicating that stiffer lateral wedges facilitate footwork execution by improving ground reaction efficiency.

These findings align with the “shoe midsole stiffness-energy loss” theory proposed by Stefanyshyn and Nigg [23], which suggests that stiffer midsole materials minimize energy dissipation at the metatarsophalangeal joint, thereby improving propulsion efficiency during takeoff. However, the study also observed that a 70D lateral wedge, while reducing ankle inversion angles, may excessively limit ankle dorsiflexion and knee joint range of motion in the coronal plane. This reflects a non-linear relationship between stiffness and joint freedom, similar to findings on forefoot bending stiffness [14], highlighting the need to balance rigidity with functional mobility in footwear design.

While Yu et al. [12] provides valuable insights into badminton shoe development, certain limitations must be acknowledged. Laboratory conditions may not fully replicate real-game scenarios, where fatigue accumulation and unpredictable movement patterns can influence biomechanical responses. Additionally, individual differences such as body weight, technical habits, and foot morphology may modulate the effects of lateral-wedge hardness, underscoring the need for further research on personalized footwear optimization.

3.4. Insole Hardness Effect

Insole hardness is a key determinant of shock absorption and force distribution during dynamic sports movements [36]. While midsole and outsole stiffness have been widely studied in relation to energy return and propulsion efficiency, the role of insole hardness in optimizing elastic energy storage and return remains less understood. One included study [20] investigated the effects of different insole hardness distributions on energy return during a badminton lunge and found no systematic alterations in elastic energy recovery, suggesting that insole properties alone may not be the primary factor influencing energy return in such activities.

Further analysis showed that the soleus exhibited a substantially greater work contribution than the gastrocnemius, indicating that elastic energy storage primarily occurs within the soleus muscle–tendon unit (MTU) during maximal badminton lunges. This aligns with the findings of Lai et al. [37], who demonstrated that the soleus tendon, due to its higher strain tolerance, stores greater elastic potential energy during the stretching phase and releases it as kinetic energy during propulsion. These observations highlight the critical role of the soleus in energy management during explosive lower-limb movements, suggesting that shoe design modifications should focus on optimizing areas that support this key muscle rather than insole hardness alone.

The lack of significant modulation by insole hardness in this study suggests that current insole designs may not yet precisely align with the biomechanical loading characteristics of the soleus, possibly due to variability in foot strike mechanics and muscle activation strategies among athletes. Additionally, while insole hardness distribution did not exhibit systematic effects on energy return, individual differences in movement techniques indicate that personalized footwear customization may be necessary to optimize comfort, force distribution, and energy efficiency in badminton-specific footwork.

3.5. Shoe Sole Effect

The shoe sole plays a crucial role in modulating foot–ground interactions, influencing force transmission, shock absorption, and movement efficiency [19,38]. In badminton, where rapid directional changes and high-impact lunges are frequent, the structural properties of the sole affect both performance and injury risk. Modifications such as midsole stiffness, tread patterns, and wedge structures alter the distribution of ground reaction forces (GRFs) and influence foot stability [23]. A well-designed sole can enhance propulsion efficiency and stability by optimizing force redirection during braking and push-off phases, while excessive rigidity may constrain foot motion, increasing stress on the lower limbs [39].

Chen et al. [19] examined the effects of a lateral forefoot wedge sole on badminton lunge biomechanics, comparing standard badminton shoes with those featuring an integrated 5° forefoot wedge. The study assessed lower-limb kinematics and kinetics during lunge movements, measuring how sole modifications affect GRF, stance time, and force application mechanics. The findings demonstrated that forefoot wedge soles significantly improved mechanical performance. Specifically, the horizontal ground reaction force (GRFh) increased by 7.8% in forward lunges, while the H/V ratio increased by 6.4% in backward lunges, indicating that the wedge facilitates more efficient force redirection [19,40]. These improvements can be attributed to the wedge’s ability to redistribute plantar pressure toward the lateral forefoot, enhancing push-off efficiency—aligning with previous research on footwear stiffness and pressure distribution [14,39]

The subjective preference for wedge shoes in stability and comfort further supports the idea that proprioceptive feedback plays a critical role in footwear design. Enhanced ankle stability may stem from increased lateral support, reducing excessive inversion moments and potentially lowering the risk of lateral ankle sprains [41]. The 5° wedge incline in this experiment alters foot contact dynamics, mimicking the mechanical advantage seen in inclined sprint start positions, which amplify horizontal force output by modifying foot placement angles [42]. However, whether these biomechanical principles directly translate to lateral movements in badminton remains to be further validated.

While this study provides valuable insights, several limitations must be acknowledged. The added mass from the external wedge prototype may have influenced GRF measurements, necessitating further research using integrated wedge designs to minimize weight discrepancies [19]. Additionally, testing only a single wedge angle (5°) limits generalizability, as previous research on lateral shuffle movements suggests that a 10° incline may better balance performance gains with joint loading concerns [39]. The exclusion of female and elite athletes further limits the applicability of these findings to broader badminton populations.

The lateral forefoot wedge sole presents a promising innovation for optimizing badminton lunge biomechanics, particularly in multidirectional force generation and footwork stability. However, long-term safety considerations, adaptive responses, and commercial footwear integration require further study to ensure performance benefits do not come at the expense of increased musculoskeletal stress.

3.6. Midsole Hardness Effect

Midsole hardness plays a critical role in impact attenuation, energy return, and force transmission, especially in sports involving frequent jumping and landing [43]. The midsole serves as a cushioning and supportive layer between the insole and the outsole, influencing how forces are absorbed and redistributed across the lower limbs [21]. Footwear design in badminton must balance propulsion efficiency during takeoff and impact mitigation upon landing, as excessive stiffness may compromise shock absorption, while excessive softness may reduce energy transfer efficiency [44]

Lin et al. [21] investigated the effects of midsole hardness, comparing 62C (soft) and 68C (hard) midsoles using temporal-spatial and ground reaction force (GRF) analyses during badminton scissor jumps. Their study found no significant differences in jump height or GRF variables during takeoff, indicating that midsole hardness does not substantially affect propulsion performance. However, during landing, the harder midsole condition resulted in a significantly higher vertical impact peak (p = 0.008), suggesting that shock attenuation may be reduced with increasing stiffness. The study also reported a longer time-to-vertical impact peak (p = 0.007) and a lower loading rate (p = 0.013) in the harder midsole condition, which may indicate a different force dissipation strategy rather than a straightforward cushioning deficit.

These findings align with previous research on midsole hardness in various sports. Lam et al. [45] demonstrated that softer midsoles in basketball footwear improved impact attenuation, reducing peak GRF and loading rates during unanticipated landings. Similarly, Shorten [44] emphasized that cushioning properties are essential for minimizing impact forces, particularly in sports with repeated jump landings. However, a study by Lin et al. [21] highlights that while harder midsoles do not necessarily enhance propulsion, they do alter shock absorption mechanics, as evidenced by higher impact peaks and prolonged force application times.

A longer time to vertical impact peak is often associated with improved impact attenuation, yet the interaction between midsole hardness and force dissipation remains complex. A harder midsole may delay force dissipation, which could alter lower-limb loading strategies and increase localized stress on the heel and forefoot. This is particularly relevant for male athletes, who exhibit a significantly higher incidence of heel pain compared with female athletes [15]. A stiffer midsole could exacerbate such injuries by increasing localized plantar pressures, necessitating the adoption of gradient midsole hardness designs, such as a softer heel for impact absorption and a firmer forefoot for energy return.

Further research should explore how emerging cushioning technologies, such as rotational shear-cushioning structures, can optimize both performance and safety in badminton footwear. Additionally, understanding how midsole properties interact with athlete-specific factors, such as body weight, foot arch structure, and playing style, will be essential for developing customized footwear solutions that enhance both jumping performance and impact protection.

3.7. Shoe Heel Effect

Heel design is a crucial factor in footwear biomechanics, influencing shock absorption, movement coordination, and force distribution during high-impact movements such as badminton lunges [46]. Variations in heel curvature, including Rounded Heel Shoe (RHS), Flattened Heel Shoe (FHS), and Standard Heel Shoe (SHS), have been studied for their effects on ground reaction forces (GRFs), joint coordination, and overall performance efficiency [16,17,18]. Understanding how different heel structures modify lower-limb mechanics can inform shoe optimization strategies tailored to athlete skill levels and movement demands.

Ryue et al. [17] examined the impact of different heel designs on contact time and shoe–ground angles in elite badminton players, reporting no significant effects of heel curvature modifications on these variables. However, Lam et al. [16] found that shoe heel curvature altered vertical loading rates during lunges, with RHS demonstrating lower maximum vertical loading rates compared with FHS and SHS. Notably, elite players exhibited significantly lower left-side peak and mean vertical loading rates in RHS, whereas intermediate players showed no measurable shoe effect on loading rate, suggesting that experience level may influence an athlete’s ability to adapt to footwear modifications.

Liu et al. [18] further investigated the influence of heel structure on knee–ankle coordination during lunges, showing that RHS promoted better movement coordination based on Phase Angle (PA) and Continuous Relative Phase (CRP) metrics. These findings suggest that rounded heel designs may facilitate smoother joint coordination during dynamic footwork, potentially improving movement efficiency. The reduced vertical loading rate observed in RHS users may be attributed to more controlled heel-to-toe transitions, which optimize force distribution and minimize abrupt ground impact forces [16].

Overall, these results highlight the importance of heel curvature in optimizing badminton lunge performance and reducing impact-related injury risks. The Rounded Heel Shoe design offers advantages in shock absorption and movement coordination, particularly for elite athletes who require precise biomechanical control during lunges. These findings support the notion that shoe optimization should be personalized based on the technical level of athletes, as biomechanical responses to footwear modifications appear to differ between highly trained and intermediate-level players.

While these studies provide valuable insights, certain limitations should be noted. The experiments focused on single-movement analyses, limiting their applicability to real-game conditions, where fatigue and variability in footwork influence biomechanics. Additionally, muscle activation patterns were not quantified, meaning that the role of neuromuscular control in footwear adaptation remains unclear. Importantly, female athletes were not included, despite research showing that women have a larger Q-angle and greater knee valgus tendencies [15]. These factors suggest that female athletes may rely more on external stability from footwear, including RHS designs, but existing studies [16,18] have not tested female samples. Future research should investigate how RHS influences knee–ankle coordination in female athletes, as well as integrate electromyographic (EMG) analysis to reveal the impact of heel design on muscle activation strategies.

4. Implications, Limitations, and Future Directions

The findings of this review highlight the significant role of badminton footwear modifications in optimizing movement efficiency, stability, and injury prevention. The biomechanical implications of forefoot bending stiffness, torsional stiffness, lateral-wedge hardness, insole hardness, shoe sole design, midsole hardness, and shoe heel design demonstrate that moderate stiffness and cushioning provide an optimal balance between energy return and joint protection [11,12,19]. Footwear modifications that enhance force redistribution, proprioceptive feedback, and lower-limb coordination can contribute to both improved performance and injury mitigation [16,18].

Despite these insights, several limitations must be acknowledged. First, publication bias may exist, as studies with significant results are more likely to be published, potentially skewing the synthesis of findings. The review was limited to English-language publications, which could introduce language bias by excluding non-English studies. Most studies were conducted on competitive male athletes, limiting generalizability to female players and recreational athletes [15]. Laboratory-based studies used controlled movement tasks, which may not fully represent in-game biomechanics, where fatigue, reactive footwork, and external perturbations affect performance [33]. The variability in study protocols regarding midsole hardness testing (62C vs. 68C), lateral wedge inclines (5° vs. 10°), and shoe stiffness classifications introduces methodological inconsistencies [39]. Additionally, longitudinal effects of footwear adaptation remain unclear, as most studies examined immediate biomechanical responses rather than long-term neuromuscular adaptations [37]. The absence of electromyographic (EMG) analysis in these studies also limits our understanding of how different shoe conditions influence muscle activation and coordination strategies [17].

Future research should expand gender-based analyses to explore sex-specific biomechanical responses to footwear modifications [15]. Real-world testing using wearable motion capture and force-sensitive insoles could improve ecological validity, enabling researchers to examine how footwear modifications interact with fatigue and reactive footwork [42]. Investigating the longitudinal effects of specific shoe features on neuromuscular adaptation will provide deeper insights into injury prevention and performance enhancement [44]. Additionally, incorporating electromyographic (EMG) analysis will allow for a more comprehensive evaluation of muscle activation patterns in response to footwear modifications [20] Advances in 3D printing, AI-driven gait analysis, and adaptive cushioning technologies may contribute to personalized footwear solutions that optimize both athletic performance and injury prevention [28]. Another limitation is the exclusion of non-English studies, which may lead to language bias, although this was based on scientific rather than resource constraints.

5. Conclusions

This systematic review aimed to evaluate how specific badminton shoe design features influence lower-limb biomechanics, injury risk, and sport-specific performance. The analysis synthesized evidence from 10 high-quality studies involving competitive-level athletes. The findings confirm that moderate stiffness and cushioning in various shoe components support optimal shock absorption, joint stability, and energy return. For example, forefoot bending and torsional stiffness improve knee and ankle stability during lunges and sidesteps, while lateral wedges and rounded heels enhance contact efficiency and reduce vertical impact loads. Collectively, these biomechanical benefits underscore the importance of tailoring footwear configurations to sport-specific movements and individual biomechanics. Effective shoe modifications can redistribute loads, reduce ligament strain, and support movement efficiency in badminton. Collectively, these biomechanical benefits underscore the importance of tailoring footwear configurations to sport-specific movements and individual biomechanics. Effective shoe modifications can redistribute loads, reduce ligament strain, and support movement efficiency in badminton. Future research should prioritize real-game biomechanical monitoring, EMG-based muscle activation studies, and sex-stratified trials to refine footwear recommendations and inform product development. By integrating advanced biomechanical testing methods and emerging footwear technologies, researchers and industry professionals can develop customized footwear solutions that balance injury prevention and performance enhancement for athletes across different skill levels and physiological profiles.