## 4 Discussion
Differences were found only on the right, which might imply more hyperpronation of the right foot. [PERSON] et al. found that foot malalignment has been correlated to running injuries, specifically MTSS [35]. Our results are consistent with [PERSON] and [PERSON] who also found hip internal rotation and knee sagittal plane movement to be correlated with MTSS [23]. However, in our study, frontal plane kinematics was not found to be associated with MTSS. GPS values were found to differ on both sides, implying that kinematic deviations are not determined or correlated to the injured side. Thus, we can assume that the total movement pattern differs between both groups. This finding correlates with [PERSON] et al. who found no difference in knee valgus angle between the painful and pain-free side as well as between the dominant and non-dominant sides [36], and [PERSON] et al. [37], who found that lower limb dominance did not affect kinematic side to side differences. These findings imply that lower limb kinematics during running are relatively symmetrical. They question asymmetry as the cause of injury, rather imply that the general running pattern, which is reflected by the total lower limb kinematics, leads to running injuries. The GDI differed in all three planes of motion, but not in all joints, and were not correlated to the injured side. This might imply that a single difference at one level, unilaterally, might be insignificant,however, it may become significant if the sum of all deviations in all joints, in more than one plane of motion, leads to a significant total change in the lower limb alignment, reflected by the GPS. This may explain the conflicting findings of several researchers who found no correlation between single kinematic deviations and injuries [32; 38]. [PERSON] et al. in their systematic review, found no conclusive biomechanical mechanism to explain the development of running related injuries [38] and concluded that current prospective evidence relating biomechanical variables to running-related injury risk is scarce and inconsistent, with findings largely dependent on the population and injuries being studied. Furthermore, [PERSON] and [PERSON] [32] reported that it is unlikely that abnormal biomechanics of the foot or tibia are responsible for increasing tension in the ITB; there was most likely a more proximal cause. They stated that their review had very limited prospective evidence, and therefore, the results should be interpreted with caution [32]. Our results might imply that correction of kinematic deviations, reflected by gait indices, may be another tool to consider in management of running injuries, targeting either a major correction at one level or several minor corrections in order to lead to changes in the GPS, and improve symptoms. This is consistent with [PERSON] et al. who reported an improvement in symptoms due to a change in several kinematic deviations, thus, concluding that many biomechanical parameters can be altered by running modification training programs and that these interventions can change the kinetic, kinematic, and spatiotemporal outcomes during running [27]. Another study found that neuromuscular training with knee valgus control instructions reduced kinetics, and injury incidence in male runners and improved kinematics [26]. Furthermore, [PERSON] et al. in their systematic review found that faulty movement patterns are associated with patellofemoral pain. They discovered that movement retraining (retraining faulty patterns) plays a significant role in addressing patellofemoral pain [25]. This study investigated a small sample of the running population, however, it presented a new perspective for evaluating kinematic deviations in runners. GPS should be implemented in the future, identifying running deviations using a single numerical value and evaluating movement in individual joints, both clinically and in research.