Next Article in Journal
Study of Online Testing of Void Defects in AM Components with Grating Laser Ultrasonic Spectrum Method
Next Article in Special Issue
Patellofemoral Joint Stress During Front and Back Squats at Two Depths
Previous Article in Journal
AI-Enhanced Nonlinear Predictive Control for Smart Greenhouses: A Performance Comparison of Forecast and Warm-Start Strategies
Previous Article in Special Issue
Effect of Vertical Ground Reaction Force Biofeedback on Knee and Hip Neuromechanical Characteristics During Walking in Older Adults
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Applied Sciences
Volume 15
Issue 14
10.3390/app15147994
applsci-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Systematic Review

Physiological and Biomechanical Characteristics of Inline Speed Skating: A Systematic Scoping Review

by
Zongze Wu
1,2,
Filipa Cardoso
1,2,*,
David B. Pyne
3,
Márcio Fagundes Goethel
1,2 and
Ricardo J. Fernandes
1,2
1
Centre for Research, Education, Innovation and Intervention in Sport (CIFI2D), Faculty of Sport, University of Porto, 4200-450 Porto, Portugal
2
Porto Biomechanics Laboratory (LABIOMEP), University of Porto, 4200-450 Porto, Portugal
3
Research Institute for Sport and Exercise, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT 2617, Australia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Appl. Sci. 2025, 15(14), 7994; https://doi.org/10.3390/app15147994
Submission received: 17 June 2025 / Revised: 10 July 2025 / Accepted: 15 July 2025 / Published: 17 July 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in the Biomechanics of Sports)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

The physiological and biomechanical characteristics of inline speed skating have not been systematically mapped nor research evidence synthesized. The aim was to identify and synthesize novel elements across studies, including participant characteristics, outcomes measures, experimental protocol, main outcomes and other relevant information, to inform evidence-based guidelines and recommendations. Following the PRISMA 2020 guidelines, a systematic search of databases was conducted to identify relevant studies. The extracted data were charted and synthesized to summarize the physiological and biomechanical aspects of inline speed skating. From 272 records, 22 studies met the defined criteria. Studies related to inline speed skating focused primarily on physiological variables (n = 14) and lower limb muscles function, with limited evidence on biomechanics of inline speed skating (n = 5) and the combination of biomechanics and physiology (n = 3). An overall unclear risk of bias was observed (59% of studies). Although studies have examined physiological and biomechanical variables, continuous physiological and biomechanical assessments of skaters performing different skills on both straight and curved tracks have not been conducted. Therefore, well-planned physiological and biomechanics studies are required to uncover underexplored areas in research and support the development of sport-specific studies.

1. Introduction

Inline speed skating, also named roller speed skating, traces its competitive origins to the 1937 World Championships in Monza (Italy) [1] and made its Olympic debut at the 2014 Summer Youth Olympic Games in Nanjing (China). This sport has gained substantial popularity in recent years, featuring several race formats such as short and long-distance competitions, indoor, outdoor and road races, over distances ranging from 100 m sprints to a full marathon (42.195 km), and with intermediate race distances including lengths of 200, 300, 500, 1000, 5000 and 20,000 m [1,2]. The inclusive nature of inline speed skating makes it suitable for participants of all ages, from children under 9 to seniors over 60 years of age, and the sport welcomes both males and females [2].
Inline speed skating is a sport that imposes substantial physiological and biomechanical demands on performers, involving both aerobic and anaerobic energy systems and the precise neuromuscular coordination of the lower limbs [3,4]. Comparing upright and low posture inline speed skating, the peak oxygen uptake in the low posture decreased by 8% and the submaximal lactate concentration increased by two-fold. Compared with ice speed skating, inline speed skating involves postural adjustments to enhance propulsion efficiency and maintain stability; however, the knee angle of speed skating increases by 7.5%, which may change the ventilation pattern during exercise, resulting in higher minute ventilation and carbon dioxide output [5]. The lower limbs serve as the primary force-generating units, where the coordinated flexion and extension of the hip, knee and ankle joints contribute to propulsion [6]. Moreover, the core musculature also plays a crucial role in stabilizing the body, enabling skaters to keep a deep-seated posture [7,8] and upper limb movements maintain the balance and stability on both straight and curve tracks [9].
Despite over three decades of research and important contributions from existing studies to advance the field, the scientific literature on inline speed skating remains limited in number and scope. Hence, there is a lack of systematic evidence evaluating performance-related research on inline speed skating, which may lead to redundant studies, key findings being overlooked or unclear research directions, limiting the quality and impact of evidence-based advice for practitioners, coaches and support staff. Therefore, the aim was to systematically examine the novel elements of the available literature on inline speed skating. This review maps key aspects such as sample characteristics, methodologies, practical applications, and limitations. By synthesizing current findings, we highlight underexplored areas and provide insights into developing evidence-based training strategies and scientific support.

2. Methods

2.1. Eligibility Criteria

The systematic scoping review protocol was designed in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 guidelines [10], including original peer-reviewed articles with no restrictions on the publication date. The protocol was created and pre-registered as an OSF on 27 January 2025 (DOI: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/EZ2DN). The research questions were defined as follows: (i) participants: inline speed skaters of any age or sex; (ii) comparators: not mandatory; (iii) intervention and outcomes: physiological and biomechanical assessments of inline speed skating (e.g., oxygen uptake, kinematics, heart rate, biomarkers and electromyography); and (iv) study design: no restrictions.

2.2. Search Strategy

Searches were conducted until 25 May 2025, using the databases PubMed, Scopus and the Web of Science. Boolean operators “OR” and “AND” were used and suitable key search terms included (i) (inline speed skating) AND (roller speed skating) [All Fields] and (ii) (inline speed skating) OR (roller speed skating) [All Fields]. The search terms were applied in PubMed, Scopus and the Web of Science databases, and the full search strategy for each database is shown in Table 1. In addition, the article references were examined to identify additional relevant studies, with no further articles meeting the inclusion criteria.

2.3. Selection and Data Collection Process

Articles were first screened based on their title, followed by an inspection of their abstract. If an article was deemed eligible or could not be excluded based on the abstract, the full text was retrieved for further assessment. The screening process was conducted independently by two authors (ZW and FC) and duplicate records were automatically removed using EndNote 21 (ClarivateTM, Philadelphia, PA, USA), after which the remaining records were extracted into a Microsoft® Excel 2019 (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA, USA) worksheet for further processing. Afterwards, the following information was included: (i) author(s) and the year of publication; (ii) sample characteristics (including sample size, sex and age); (iii) methods, physiological and biomechanical variables; (iv) test location for inline speed skating; (v) experimental protocol; and (vi) main outcomes.

2.4. Study and Research Division

The literature search strategy initially identified 272 articles from multiple academic databases, 94 articles searched in PubMed, 54 articles searched in Scopus and 124 articles searched in the Web of Science. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, 22 studies were included for further analysis, based on the availability of full-text access. The study selection process is presented in Figure 1 and the main results of each included trial are presented in Table 2, Table 3 and Table 4, respectively divided and categorized into physiological (n = 14) [3,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23], biomechanical (n = 5) [24,25,26,27,28] and combined biomechanical-physiological assessment (n = 3) [4,5,29]. The publication dates of the included studies ranged from 1987 to 2025, with studies conducted across seven countries: Germany (n = 7), the United States of America (n = 5), Italy (n = 5), China (n = 2), Brazil (n = 1), Canada (n = 1), and Iran (n = 1).

2.5. Study Risk of Bias

Risk of bias was assessed for each included article by an independent reviewer (ZW), with any discrepancies resolved by another author (FC). The assessment was conducted using the Risk of Bias Assessment Tool for Non-Randomized Studies (RoBANS 2), which includes eight domains: (i) the comparability of the target group; (ii) target group selection; (iii) confounders; (iv) the measurement of intervention/exposure; (v) the blinding of assessors; (vi) outcome assessment; (vii) incomplete outcome data; and (viii) selective outcome reporting. The overall risk of bias was classified as “low” if all domains were rated as “low risk”, “unclear” if at least one domain was rated as “unclear risk”, and “high” if any domain was rated as “high risk” [30].

3. Results

3.1. Physiological and Technical Performance

The studies summarized in Table 2 examined both elite and novice inline speed skaters, with most studies focused on physiological outcome measures. The testing protocols primarily employed an incremental exercise design, with each stage lasting 3–5 min and velocity increasing by 2–3 km/h. Assessments were conducted either on a treadmill or asphalt track ranging from 200 to 644 m in length. One study demonstrated the validity of lactate thresholds, such as the fixed 4 mmol/L threshold and the individual anaerobic threshold, which can be used in inline speed skating [15]. Furthermore, training studies have shown that both running and short-term high-intensity interval training were effective in improving aerobic capacity [19,20].
Meanwhile, key factors in elite skaters performance were highlighted in research involving a 300 m time trial showing that lower limb explosiveness (measured by pre-competition squat jump height) was significantly correlated with total competition time (r = −0.71), indicating that neuromuscular strength is a key determinant of short-distance skating performance [21]. In addition, as age and competition experience increases, skaters become more skillful in techniques and strategies. A low body posture can reduce the relative cardiovascular load, which is reflected in the reduction in heart rate and oxygen uptake at a fixed submaximal speed [11]. This evidence further highlights the physiological benefits of low crouching, especially during cornering and drafting [14,27].
Skating competitions include 300 m races and marathon events, the latter of which usually last more than 70 min [14,16]. Acceleration and drafting strategies are crucial for enhancing performance, as they require skaters to maintain high average velocity, possess high aerobic capacity, and recover rapidly between high-intensity efforts [24]. In addition, tests are usually conducted at an ambient temperature of 22–27 °C and with wind speeds below 5 km/h [14]. Lower temperatures during winter training increase the risk of injury, and skaters often use running or cycling instead of outdoor skating to maintain consistent training volumes [13,18].

3.2. Neuromuscular Characteristics and Technique Efficiency

The studies in Table 3 focus on muscle activation, movement patterns, muscle asymmetry and training methods. Key data extracted from electromyography, kinematic analysis and accelerometer modalities provide valuable insights into the preparation on inline speed skaters. There were substantial differences in muscle engagement between skaters of different experience levels: elite skaters activated 47% of their gluteus medius output during the propulsive phase, while novice skaters only activated 34% [24]. The efficiency of acceleration depends on skating technique, stride symmetry, and single-leg support technique during turns [27]. Elite skaters also had a stride propulsion efficiency of 56% of the total cycle duration, while novices began recovery too early, at only 53% of the total cycle duration [24]. In addition, right lower limb muscles of inline speed skaters fatigue more easily, reflecting the muscle imbalance caused by counterclockwise skating [23].

3.3. Physiological Responses and Biomechanical Constraints

In Table 4, a study by Rundell reported that when exercising at 88% of VO2max, HR was higher during treadmill roller skating compared to treadmill running. However, VO2peak during low body posture was 8% lower than that of upright skating, suggesting impaired oxygen delivery in low body posture [29]. In addition, at a submaximal HR, the submaximal [La−] of treadmill low body posture skating (11.0 mmol/L) was higher than that of treadmill running (10.6 mmol/L) and upright skating (10.4 mmol/L) [29]. Another study of ice speed skating and roller speed skating found no significant differences in VO2 and HR but reported that the knee angle was 7.5% greater in roller speed skating than in ice speed skating [5]. These findings highlight selected biomechanical constraints and physiological limitations induced by the skating posture.

3.4. Research Sample Characteristics and Materials

Although the sample sizes varied (ranging from 1 to 36 participants), most studies (95%) included fewer than 30 participants. Six studies (27%) involved males and females [12,15,18,19,22,28], eight studies (36%) only involved males [3,4,5,11,13,14,27,29], seven studies (32%) included only females [16,17,20,23,24,25,26] and one study did not report the sex of participants (4.5%) [21]. Figure 2 shows the distribution of trials by publication year from 1987 to 2024, with participant age ranging from 18 to 49 years. Including articles that examined both physiological and biomechanical measures, the field was dominated by physiological assessments (77%, e.g., HR, [La−] and gas analyzers), while biomechanical assessments were concentrated on cameras and surface electromyography (36%). In addition, fewer trials used a combination of physiological and biomechanical measures to assess skating performance (14%).

3.5. Test Location and Experiment Method

Table 1, Table 2 and Table 3 indicate the variety of outdoor and indoor tracks and laboratory test locations. Research on inline speed skating has primarily employed incremental exercise to assess both aerobic and anaerobic outputs and biomechanical analyses to evaluate technical proficiency. These studies have provided valuable insights into physiological response characteristics, knee joint kinematics, muscle activation patterns, and plantar pressure distribution during skating. Furthermore, to better replicate competitive conditions, some investigations have incorporated specialized skill assessment protocols, such as 300 m time trials, to evaluate technical execution and performance under sport-specific constraints.

3.6. Risk of Bias

Figure 3 shows the risk of bias judgements using the RoBANS 2 tool, with no study being classified as low risk in all domains. Ten studies showed a high risk of bias [3,16,19,21,23,24,25,26,27,28]. For unclear risk, in comparability of the target group, one study was included due to the absence of age-related information [23]. In target group selection, 13 studies included only male or only female participants [3,4,5,11,13,14,17,20,23,24,26,27,29]. With confounders, it was unclear whether training intensity, wind speed and ambient temperature were adequately controlled [3,12,13,14,15,18,19,20,21,23,24,26]. In the blinding of assessors, studies did not report whether blinding was implemented [4,5,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,20,21,22,27,29] and in the incomplete outcome data, the missing data were either not described or insufficiently explained [3,4,5,12,13,14,16,17,18,20,21,22,27,28,29]. Finally, in selective outcome reporting, not all prespecified outcomes were reported [5,27].
As illustrated in Figure 4, the methodological quality of the included studies exhibited substantial variability across bias domains. The most critical limitations were observed in the reporting of blinding of assessors: 32% of studies were rated as high risk (the highest among all domains), with 64% receiving an unclear judgment. For target group selection, 14% of studies were deemed high risk, and only 27% demonstrated low risk. Similarly, for the control of confounders, only 4.6% of studies were rated high risk and 41% as low risk. Notably, the measurement of intervention/exposure domain showed robust methodological rigor (100% low risk). Other domains with favorable ratings included selective outcome reporting (91% low risk). However, incomplete outcome data had a 68% unclear risk due to insufficient reporting. The overall risk distribution across all studies was high risk and unclear (45 and 59%) and no studies were classified as uniformly low risk across all domains.

4. Discussion

4.1. Physiological and Biomechanical Studies of Inline Speed Skating

The aim of this scoping review was to systematically assess evidence on the physiology and biomechanics of inline speed skating to inform recommendations and guidelines on testing and research strategies. Most of the relevant literature on inline speed skating has evaluated VO2 and [La−], with a limited number of studies examining inline speed skating biomechanics. One of the main outcomes of this scoping review was the limited number of studies identified against the inclusion and exclusion criteria, clearly demonstrating the paucity of data and the importance of upcoming research in this area.
The available literature on inline speed skating provides preliminary and useful insights into physiological and biomechanical parameters. Inline speed skating has attracted attention primarily via the measurement of VO2 and [La−]. [La−] testing has been widely used to assess the anaerobic (lactate) threshold and associated exercise intensities, and its reliability in inline speed skating has been verified [15]. Similarly to ice speed skating, the low posture in inline speed skating results in a blood flow restriction that contributes to lactate accumulation [5,31]. For example, compared to upright gliding, low body posture skating during maximal exercise elicits a 9% increase in [La−] [32].
Another study observed that, at a speed of 27.4 km/h, VO2 decreased by 18% in the bent body position compared to the upright posture [11]. This decrease might be associated with variations in knee and trunk angles, highlighting the utility of VO2 and [La−] measurements in understanding the physiological demands of inline speed skating. Clearly, there is a need for more sports-specific research, as direct extrapolation from biomechanically similar movements may overlook critical physiological and technical nuances unique to inline speed skating [17]. For example, inline speed skaters exhibit a knee joint angle approximately 7.5% greater than that of ice speed skaters [5]. Another study compared the oxygen saturation of the vastus lateralis muscle in upright and low-posture skating, where the maximum oxygen saturation during cuff ischemia in upright and low posture was 60.4% and 74.9%, indicating that the vastus lateralis muscle hypoxia was more severe during low-posture skating [32]. In addition, a marked difference was observed in adductor muscle activation during the recovery phase between elite athletes and novice skaters (17 and 26%) [24]. These data are useful for coaches prescribing technique and positional changes, strength and conditioning coaches delivering gym training, and researchers interested in these questions.
Surface electromyography, accelerometers and cameras have provided useful insights into the biomechanical and neuromuscular aspects of inline speed skating. Surface electromyography revealed substantial differences in inline speed skating muscle activation patterns, particularly between the left and right lower limbs. One study demonstrated that the left % root mean square/maximum voluntary isometric contraction of vastus lateralis exhibited greater fatigue resistance than the right (79 and 94%), evidence of asymmetric muscle recruitment [23]. This asymmetry was further influenced by skating velocity, with higher speed increasing muscle activation and influencing coordination [12,29]. The vertical component of ground reaction forces was correlated significantly with performance times in the start (R2 = 0.62), turning (R2 = 0.65) and acceleration phases (R2 = 0.54) [28]. Meanwhile, compared to ice speed skating, inline speed skating exhibits a higher surface friction loss ratio (18 and 45%) [5]. To better understand neuromuscular and biomechanical patterns, the use of accelerometers and cameras has been instrumental in quantifying kinematics and movement efficiency. In addition, an in-shoe accelerometer system showed that forefoot pressure and a forward-leaning push-off posture relate to the best push-off strategy [28], although a low body posture impairs muscle oxygenation [13].
During skating, the coordination of upper limb swings with the trunk and lower limbs are important for maintaining body balance, especially with the crossover step [33,34]. The natural swing of the upper limbs allows athletes to effectively adjust their balance [35]. Active movements of upper limbs help lateral stability control. Whether the theoretical framework is applicable to dynamic balance regulation in inline speed skating needs further study [36]. Other biomechanical studies have mostly focused on the lower limbs. In inline speed skating, athletes need to quickly adjust posture in a constantly changing environment, and the upper limb swing can provide inertial support for rapid responses [6,37]. Current research on the effects of upper limb movements on performance is limited. Therefore, additional integrated kinematic, biomechanical and physiological analyses are required.

4.2. Limitations

Despite a growing amount of the literature investigating the physiological and biomechanical aspects of inline speed skating, several critical limitations are evident. Most existing studies emphasize acute physiological responses (e.g., VO2, HR and [La−]) to skating on track or in the laboratory. Moreover, there is a notable lack of research assessing the effects of specific training modalities, such as incremental exercise, crossover step skills training or strength-based training, and the effects of short- and long-term training interventions. These limitations constrain the use of current evidence for coaches and practitioners. In addition, many studies suffer from a small sample size and single-sex participants, which further limit generalizability. Considering the dynamic and asymmetrical neuromuscular demands of sport, future research employing sport-specific protocols in simulating competition-relevant settings is urgently warranted.

4.3. Directions for Future Research

In summary, physiological and biomechanical assessments of inline speed skating offer essential insights for enhancing training and performance. Combining advanced motion capture, wearable sensor technologies, a portable gas analyzer and computational modeling to comprehensively assess skating movement patterns, metabolic responses and kinematic data, thereby facilitating targeted interventions and optimized training programs, is recommended for future investigations. Through real monitoring, personalized assessment and data analysis, a comprehensive understanding of the factors that influence inline speed skating performance can be achieved. This integrated framework will inform the development of targeted training interventions to optimize performance under variable environmental conditions. This paradigm will benefit both athletes and coaches, contributing to a more comprehensive understanding of inline speed skating. Future research should focus on establishing a sports-specific research framework adopting a multidisciplinary approach that integrates motion capture system with physiological monitoring methods. Analyzing the biomechanical characteristics and energy expenditure of technical movements across a range of skating speeds will be informative.

5. Conclusions

This scoping review provides an overview of the physiological and biomechanical characteristics of inline speed skating, examining key physiological and biomechanical variables, including VO2, [La−], VE, muscle activation, joint angles and kinematic data. Although preliminary studies have identified worthwhile correlations between [La−] dynamics, exercise intensities and asymmetrical activation patterns in the lower limb muscles, more work is required. These findings are also partly based on the direct application of research paradigms from related sports, such as ice speed skating. Moreover, evidence-based training intervention programs should be developed to target these sport-specific demands. This research will contribute to a more comprehensive system for inline speed skating training and provide a scientific foundation for enhancing athletic performance.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, Z.W., F.C., M.F.G., D.B.P. and R.J.F.; methodology, Z.W. and F.C.; writing—original draft preparation, Z.W.; writing—review and editing, Z.W., F.C., M.F.G., D.B.P. and R.J.F.; supervision, F.C., M.F.G., D.B.P. and R.J.F. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, I.P. (FCT) and the European Union (EU) by project reference UIDB/05913/2020 and DOI identifier 10.54499/UIDB/05913/2020.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Olympics, Roller Speed Skating. Available online: https://www.olympics.com/en/sports/roller-speed-skating/ (accessed on 20 March 2025).
  2. Worldskate, W.S.K. Speed Rulebook. 2025. Available online: https://www.worldskate.org/speed/about/regulations.html (accessed on 20 March 2025).
  3. Wallick, M.E.; Porcari, J.P.; Wallick, S.B.; Berg, K.M.; Brice, G.A.; Arimond, G.R. Physiological responses to in-line skating compared to treadmill running. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 1995, 27, 242–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Rundell, K.W.; Nioka, S.; Chance, B. Hemoglobin/myoglobin desaturation during speed skating. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 1997, 29, 248–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. De Boer, R.W.; Vos, E.; Hutter, W.; De Groot, G.; van Ingen Schenau, G.J. Physiological and biomechanical comparison of roller skating and speed skating on ice. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. Occup. Physiol. 1987, 56, 562–569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Van der Kruk, E.; Veeger, H.E.J.; van der Helm, F.C.T.; Schwab, A.L. Design and verification of a simple 3D dynamic model of speed skating which mimics observed forces and motions. J. Biomech. 2017, 64, 93–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Konings, M.J.; Elferink-Gemser, M.T.; Stoter, I.K.; Van der Meer, D.; Otten, E.; Hettinga, F.J. Performance characteristics of long-track speed skaters: A literature review. Sports Med. 2015, 45, 505–516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Khuyagbaatar, B.; Purevsuren, T.; Park, W.M.; Kim, K.; Kim, Y.H. Interjoint coordination of the lower extremities in short-track speed skating. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part H 2017, 231, 987–993. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Zhang, Y.; Wang, Y.; Toda, Y.; Minami, M. Effectiveness of swing arm for walking/skating efficiencies. In Proceedings of the 26th International Symposium on Artificial Life and Robotics, Beppu, Japan, 20–23 January 2022. [Google Scholar]
  10. Page, M.J.; McKenzie, J.E.; Bossuyt, P.M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Moher, D. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Br. Med. J. 2021, 372, n71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Frank, J.F.; Steven, J.K.; Clinton, A.B.; Charles, R.C.; Mark, J.H.; Takeshi, K. Cardiorespiratory responses during exercise in competitive in-line skaters. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 1995, 27, 682–687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Melanson, E.L.; Freedson, P.S.; Webb, R.; Jungbluth, S.; Kozlowski, N. Exercise responses to running and in-line skating at self-selected paces. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 1996, 28, 247–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Baum, K.; Hoy, S.; Fischer, F.; Leyk, D.; Schmidt, O.; Essfeld, D. Comparison between the physiological response to roller skiing and in-line skating in biathletes. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 1999, 31, 595–598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Krieg, A.; Meyer, T.; Clas, S.; Kindermann, W. Characteristics of inline speedskating-Incremental tests and effect of drafting. Int. J. Sports Med. 2006, 27, 818–823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Hecksteden, A.; Heinze, T.; Faude, O.; Kindermann, W.; Meyer, T. Validity of lactate thresholds in inline speed skating. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2015, 29, 2497–2502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Stangier, C.; Abel, T.; Mierau, J.; Hollmann, W.; Strüder, H.K. Cardiorespiratory demands during an inline speed skating marathon race: A case report. J. Sport Med. Phys. Fit. 2016, 56, 1007–1012. [Google Scholar]
  17. Stangier, C.; Abel, T.; Mierau, J.; Gutmann, B.; Hollmann, W.; Strueder, H.K. Comparison of sport-specific and non-specific exercise testing in inline speed skating. J. Sport Med. Phys. Fit. 2016, 56, 406–414. [Google Scholar]
  18. Stangier, C.; Abel, T.; Mierau, J.; Hollmann, W.; Strüder, H.K. Effects of cycling versus running training on sprint and endurance capacity in inline speed skating. J. Sport Sci. Med. 2016, 15, 41. [Google Scholar]
  19. Stangier, C.; Abel, T.; Hesse, C.; Claen, S.; Mierau, J.; Hollmann, W.; Strüder, H.K. Effects of cycling vs. running training on endurance performance in preparation for inline speed skating. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2016, 30, 1597–1606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Fereshtian, S.; Sheykhlouvand, M.; Forbes, S.; Agha-Alinejad, H.; Gharaat, M. Physiological and performance responses to high-intensity interval training in female inline speed skaters. Apunts Sports Med. 2017, 52, 131–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Invernizzi, P.L.; Scurati, R.; Crotti, M.; Bosio, A.; Longo, S.; Esposito, F. Physiological and technical commitment during a 300-m in-line skating trial in athletes of different age categories. J. Sport Med. Phys. Fit. 2019, 59, 25–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Piucco, T.; dos Santos, S.G.; de Lucas, R.D.; Dias, J.A. A novel incremental slide board test for speed skaters: Reliability analysis and comparison with a cycling test. Apunts Med. Esport 2015, 50, 57–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  23. Bongiorno, G.; Biancuzzi, H.; Dal Mas, F.; Miceli, L. Evaluation of muscle energy in isometric maintenance as an index of muscle fatigue in roller speed skating. Front. Sports Act. Living 2023, 5, 1153946. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Bongiorno, G.; Sisti, G.; Biancuzzi, H.; Dal Mas, F.; Minisini, F.G.; Miceli, L. Training in Roller Speed Skating: Proposal of Surface Electromyography and Kinematics Data for Educational Purposes in Junior and Senior Athletes. Sensors 2024, 24, 7617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Bongiorno, G.; Sisti, G.; Dal Mas, F.; Biancuzzi, H.; Varrecchia, T.; Chini, G.; Miceli, L. The Kinematic and Electromyographic Analysis of Roller Skating at Different Speeds on a Treadmill: A Case Study. Sensors 2024, 24, 5738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Bongiorno, G.; Biancuzzi, H.; Dal Mas, F.; Fasano, G.; Miceli, L. Roller speed skating kinematics and electromyographic analysis: A methodological approach. Sports 2022, 10, 209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Chen, J.; Xu, K.; Ma, H.; Ding, X.L. Motion characteristics of human roller skating. Biol. Open 2019, 8, bio037713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Wu, W.L.; Hsu, H.T.; Chu, I.H.; Tsai, F.H.; Liang, J.M. Selected plantar pressure characteristics associated with the skating performance of national in-line speed skaters. Sports Biomech. 2017, 16, 210–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Rundell, K.W. Compromised oxygen uptake in speed skaters during treadmill in-line skating. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 1996, 28, 120–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Seo, H.J.; Kim, S.Y.; Lee, Y.J.; Park, J.E. RoBANS 2: A revised risk of bias assessment tool for nonrandomized studies of interventions. Korean J. Fam. Med. 2023, 44, 249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Takarada, Y.; Takazawa, H.; Sato, Y.; Takebayashi, S.; Tanaka, Y.; Ishii, N. Effects of resistance exercise combined with moderate vascular occlusion on muscular function in humans. J. Appl. Physiol. 2000, 88, 2097–2106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Foster, C.; Rundell, K.W.; Snyder, A.C.; Stray-Gundersen, J.; Kemkers, G.; Thometz, N.; Knapp, E. Evidence for restricted muscle blood flow during speed skating. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 1999, 31, 1433–1440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Smith, A.M.; Krause, D.A.; Stuart, M.J.; Montelpare, W.J.; Sorenson, M.C.; Link, A.A.; Stuart, M.B. Skating crossovers on a motorized flywheel: A preliminary experimental design to test effect on speed and on crossovers. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2013, 27, 3412–3418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Jones, B.D.; Wheat, J.; Middleton, K.; Carey, D.L.; Heller, B. Reliability of running gait variability measures calculated from inertial measurement units. J. Biomech. 2025, 180, 112515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Donelan, J.M.; Shipman, D.W.; Kram, R.; Kuo, A.D. Mechanical and metabolic requirements for active lateral stabilization in human walking. J. Biomech. 2004, 37, 827–835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Hof, A.L.; Gazendam, M.; Sinke, W. The condition for dynamic stability. J. Biomech. 2005, 38, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Bruijn, S.M.; Meijer, O.G.; Beek, P.J.; Van Dieen, J.H. The effects of arm swing on human gait stability. J. Exp. Biol. 2010, 213, 3945–3952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Applsci 15 07994 g001
Figure 1. PRISMA flowchart detailing selection of inline speed skating studies.
Figure 1. PRISMA flowchart detailing selection of inline speed skating studies.
Applsci 15 07994 g001
Applsci 15 07994 g002
Figure 2. The number of articles on inline speed skating over the period 1987–2024 highlighting the primary measurements investigated.
Figure 2. The number of articles on inline speed skating over the period 1987–2024 highlighting the primary measurements investigated.
Applsci 15 07994 g002
Applsci 15 07994 g003
Figure 3. Low (+), unclear (?) or high (−) judgments by domain for each study. Colors indicate judgment levels: green = low risk, yellow = unclear risk, red = high risk. D = domain as D1: comparability of the target group; D2: target group selection; D3: confounders; D4: measurement of intervention/exposure; D5: blinding of assessors; D6: outcome assessment; D7: incomplete outcome data; and D8: selective outcome reporting [3,4,5,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29].
Figure 3. Low (+), unclear (?) or high (−) judgments by domain for each study. Colors indicate judgment levels: green = low risk, yellow = unclear risk, red = high risk. D = domain as D1: comparability of the target group; D2: target group selection; D3: confounders; D4: measurement of intervention/exposure; D5: blinding of assessors; D6: outcome assessment; D7: incomplete outcome data; and D8: selective outcome reporting [3,4,5,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29].
Applsci 15 07994 g003
Applsci 15 07994 g004
Figure 4. Risk of bias domains for research articles on inline speed skating expressed as percentage of included studies. See caption for Figure 3 for definition of Domains 1–8.
Figure 4. Risk of bias domains for research articles on inline speed skating expressed as percentage of included studies. See caption for Figure 3 for definition of Domains 1–8.
Applsci 15 07994 g004
Table 1. Full search strategies for PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science databases.
Table 1. Full search strategies for PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science databases.
DatabaseObservationsSearch Strategy
PubMedThe “All Fields” was used
(i)
(inline speed skating) AND (roller speed skating)
(ii)
(inline speed skating) OR (roller speed skating)
ScopusThe “All Fields” was used
(i)
ALL (“inline speed skating”) AND (“roller speed skating”)
(ii)
ALL (“inline speed skating”) OR (“roller speed skating”)
Web of scienceThe “All Fields” was used
(i)
(ALL = (inline speed skating)) AND ALL = (roller speed skating)
(ii)
(ALL = (inline speed skating)) OR ALL = (roller speed skating)
Table 2. Overview of data extracted from physiology studies of inline speed skating.
Table 2. Overview of data extracted from physiology studies of inline speed skating.
Authors (year)SubjectsOutcome MeasuresTest LocationExperimental ProtocolMain Outcomes
(Wallick et al., 1995) [3]n = 16;
sex: ♂;
age: 18–37 years		VO2, VE and HRTreadmill(i) 3 min/stage
(ii) 4–6 stages
(iii) 5 min interval		Physiological response of inline speed skating similar to treadmill running
(Fedel, 1995) [11]n = 12;
sex: ♂;
age: 30 ± 6 years		VO2 and HRIndoor (one lap equals 644 m)(i) 22.5 and 27.4 km/h
(ii) upright and low posture		(i) compared with runners, skaters have significant HR increase at 60% VO2 peak
(ii) 27.4 km/h: low posture reduced physiological load
(Melanson et al., 1996) [12]n = 20;
sex: ♂ (n = 10); age: 24.7 ± 4.5 years;
sex: ♀ (n = 10); age: 25.7 ± 4.6 years		VO2 and HROutdoor (a smooth asphalt road, 480 m)(i) maintain a steady pace 15 min
(ii) skaters-selected aerobic exercise intensity		Compared with inline speed skating, VO2 was 4.8% higher during running
(Baum et al., 1999) [13]n = 8;
sex: ♂;
age: 20.4 ± 3.9 years		VO2, VE, HR and [La−]Outdoor (asphalt road, 2211 m)Three [La−] intensities:
(i) 2 mmol/L;
(ii) 4 mmol/L;
(iii) maximum speed		Inline speed skating, aerobic training intensities can be obtained at competitive velocities compared with roller skiing skating
(Krieg et al., 2006) [14]n = 8;
sex: ♂;
age: 25 ± 6 years		VO2, HR and [La−]Oval asphalt track, 300 m(i) start at 24 km/h;
(ii) 3 min/stage;
(iii) +3 km/h each stage;
(iv) 1 min interval rest		Compared with cycling, the attainment of VO2peak is not affected in inline speed skating
(Hecksteden et al., 2015) [15]n = 16;
sex: ♀ (n = 4); ♂ (n = 12);
age: 30 ± 10 years		HR and [La−]Oval
asphalt track, 300 m		(i) start at 24 km/h;
(ii) 3 min/stage;
(iii) +2 km/h each stage;
(iv) 1 min interval rest		IAT and LT4 may be considered as valid estimates of the MLSS in inline speed skating
(Stangier, T. Abel et al., 2016a) [16]n = 1;
sex: ♀;
age: 20 years		VO2, VE, HR and [La−]Outdoor dry road(i) start at 22 km/h;
(ii) 5 min/stage;
(iii) +2 km/h each stage;
(iv) 1 min interval rest		Polarized training recommended to enhance aerobic and anaerobic capacities
(Stangier et al., 2016) [17]n = 8;
sex: ♀;
age: 30 ± 4 years		VO2, HR and [La−]A 300 m track(i) Start at 22 km/h;
(ii) 5 min/stage;
(iii) +2 km/h each stage;
(iv) 1 min interval rest.		Cycling and running tests are considered qualified alternatives to test inline speed skating performance
(Stangier, T. Abel et al., 2016b) [18]n = 16;
sex: ♂ (n = 8); ♀ (n = 8);
age: 24 ± 8 years		VO2, VE, HR, [La−] and blood glucoseA 200 m track(i) Start at 24 km/h;
(ii) 5 min/stage;
(iii) +2 km/h each stage.		VO2peak ↑ 17% after 8 weeks of running and cycling for skaters
(Stangier, Abel, Hesse et al., 2016) [19]n = 16;
sex: ♂ and ♀;
age: 24 ± 8 years		VO2, VE and [La−]A 200 m indoor track(i) Start at 22 km/h;
(ii) 5 min/stage;
(iii) +2 km/h each stage.		8-week cycling/running at 56% VO2max impaired skating technique
(Fereshtian et al., 2017) [20]n = 28;
Sex: ♀;
age: 20 ± 4 years		VO2, HR and corpuscular
hemoglobin		A 200 m trackIncremental testing, Wingate test and time competitionVO2 ↑ up to 7.6% in HIIT
(Invernizzi et al., 2019) [21]n = 36;
sex: unreported;
age: 14–24 years		HR and [La−]A 200 m track300 m race, complete squat jumps before and after raceTotal skating time and lower limb strength negatively correlated (r = −0.71)
(Piucco et al., 2015) [22]n = 10;
sex: ♂ (n = 8); ♀ (n = 2);
age: 30.6 ± 6 years		VO2, VE, HR and [La−]Laboratory (a cycle ergometer and a slide board)(i) Cadence: 30 push-off/min;
(ii) Increased by 3 push-off/min.		Slide board can fully evaluate aerobic capacity of inline speed skating skaters
(Bongiorno et al., 2023) [23]n = 3;
sex: ♀;
age: unreported		Fatigue of gluteus maximus and vastus lateralisUnreported1 min isometric contractionLeft-side musculature has greater resistance to fatigue
♀: female; ♂: male; VO2: oxygen uptake; VE: ventilation; HR: heart rate; [La−]: blood lactate concentration; MLSS: maximum lactate steady state; LT4: blood lactate concentration of 4 mmol/L; IAT: individual anaerobic threshold; HIIT: high-intensity interval training; ↑: indicates an increase.
Table 3. Overview of data extracted from biomechanical studies of inline speed skating.
Table 3. Overview of data extracted from biomechanical studies of inline speed skating.
Authors (year)SubjectsOutcome MeasuresTest LocationExperimental ProtocolMain Outcomes
(Wu et al., 2017) [28]n = 14;
sex: ♂ (n = 7); ♀ (n = 7);
age: 18.3 ± 3.6 years		Plantar pressure200 m trackComplete a 300 m time trial with maximum effortIn skating cycle, forefoot accounts for 80% of maximum force, hindfoot for 20%
(Chen et al., 2019) [27]n = 5;
sex: ♂;
age: unreported		Linear and
turning gait of
roller skating		10 × 3 × 3 m3 wooden floor spaceSkating in straight lines and turnsInverted pendulum model describing supporting leg in roller skating
(Bongiorno et al., 2022) [26]n = 1;
sex: ♀;
age: 30 years		Agonist/antagonist muscle activation, acceleration and speedOutdoor 300 m skating rink(i) 100 m;
(ii) Ten skating cycles;
(iii) four times;
(iv) 5 min interval rest.		Agonist/antagonist muscle activation levels and body acceleration in three spatial axes
(Bongiorno, Sisti, Dal Mas et al., 2024) [25]n = 1;
sex: ♀;
age: 30 years		Hip, knee and ankle extensor muscle activation and accelerationTreadmill (2.5 m wide and 3.5 m long)(i) 20 km/h and 32 km/h;
(ii) An inclination of 1°;
(iii) 30 min between two speeds.		(i) Higher speeds ↑ muscle activation
(ii) Extensor muscle activation is proportional to vertical component of acceleration
(Bongiorno, Sisti, Biancuzzi et al., 2024) [24]n = 3;
sex: ♀;
age: 13 and 49 years		Muscle activation of lower limbs and
acceleration		Outdoor 80 m road(i) Maximum isometric contractions of the lower limbs;
(ii) 80 m skating.		Compared with elite athletes, novice athletes show uneven muscle co-activation (25%) and premature propulsion (47%)
♀: female; ♂: male; ↑: indicates an increase.
Table 4. Extracted data from biomechanical–physiological combined studies of inline speed skating.
Table 4. Extracted data from biomechanical–physiological combined studies of inline speed skating.
Authors (year)SubjectsOutcome MeasuresTestLocationExperimental ProtocolMain Outcomes
(De Boer et al., 1987) [5]n = 8;
sex: ♂;
age: 32.8 ± 12.2 y		VO2, VE, HR and knee/hip joint anglesIndoor track (length: 267 m, curve radius: 18.9 m)7-lap competition (1869 m)(i) VO2 of inline speed skating (53.3 mL/min/kg) vs. ice speed skating (50.5 mL/min/kg), no significant difference
(ii) knee angle of inline speed skating 7.5% higher than ice speed skating
(Rundell, 1996) [29]n = 7;
sex: ♂;
age: 18 ± 2.6 y		VO2, VE, [La−] and knee/trunk joint anglesTreadmill (2.44 × 3.05 m)(i) 4 min test (2.24, 2.68, 3.13 and 3.58 m/s);
(ii) A slope of 5%
After rest, 4.03 m/s, slope was increased 1%/min		(i) VO2 (ml/kg/min): low posture (57.2 ± 2.7), upright (62.3 ± 4.0), running (64.3 ± 1.6)
(ii) VO2 ↓ and [La−] ↑ relate to reduced knee or trunk angle
(Rundell et al., 1997) [4]n = 8;
sex: ♂;
age: 18.6 ± 3.66 y		VO2, HR, [La−], infrared spectrum and knee/trunk joint anglesTreadmill (skating surface of 2.44 × 3.05 m)4% slope, 2.7 and 3.1 m/s, upright and low posture, four trials, 5 min each(i) deoxygenation about 50% during low posture, higher than during high posture skating
(ii) hemoglobin highly correlated with [La−] but not VO2
♂: male; HR: heart rate; VO2: oxygen uptake; VE: ventilation; [La−]: blood lactate concentration; ↓: indicates a decrease; ↑: indicates an increase.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Wu, Z.; Cardoso, F.; Pyne, D.B.; Goethel, M.F.; Fernandes, R.J. Physiological and Biomechanical Characteristics of Inline Speed Skating: A Systematic Scoping Review. Appl. Sci. 2025, 15, 7994. https://doi.org/10.3390/app15147994

AMA Style

Wu Z, Cardoso F, Pyne DB, Goethel MF, Fernandes RJ. Physiological and Biomechanical Characteristics of Inline Speed Skating: A Systematic Scoping Review. Applied Sciences. 2025; 15(14):7994. https://doi.org/10.3390/app15147994

Chicago/Turabian Style

Wu, Zongze, Filipa Cardoso, David B. Pyne, Márcio Fagundes Goethel, and Ricardo J. Fernandes. 2025. "Physiological and Biomechanical Characteristics of Inline Speed Skating: A Systematic Scoping Review" Applied Sciences 15, no. 14: 7994. https://doi.org/10.3390/app15147994

APA Style

Wu, Z., Cardoso, F., Pyne, D. B., Goethel, M. F., & Fernandes, R. J. (2025). Physiological and Biomechanical Characteristics of Inline Speed Skating: A Systematic Scoping Review. Applied Sciences, 15(14), 7994. https://doi.org/10.3390/app15147994

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop