Refine
Document Type
- Article (14)
- Conference Proceeding (6)
- Postprint (4)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
Language
- English (25)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (25)
Keywords
- Children (3)
- Young athletes (3)
- adolescents (3)
- prevalence (3)
- EMG (2)
- Gait (2)
- Injury (2)
- Pain occurrence (2)
- Training volume (2)
- body-mass index (2)
Institute
- Department Sport- und Gesundheitswissenschaften (25) (remove)
Research question: This study aimed to establish reference values in 1-14 year old healthy children and to implement FPA-percentile curves for daily clinical use. Methods: 5910 healthy children performed at least 3 repetitions of barefoot walking over an instrumented walkway using a pressure measurement platform. The FPA [degrees] was extracted and analyzed by age and gender (mean +/- standard deviation; median with percentiles, MANOVA (age, gender) and Wilcoxon-Signed-Rank test for intra-individual side differences (alpha = 0.05). Results: FPA maximum was observed in 2-year-old children and diminished significant until the age of 4 to moderate out-toeing. For ages 5-14, no statistically significant differences in FPA values were present (p > 0.05). MANOVA confirmed age (p < 0.001) and gender (p < 0.001) as significant FPA influencing factors, without combined effect (p > 0.05). In every age group, right feet showed significantly greater out-toeing (p < 0.05). Significance: Percentile values indicate a wide FPA range in children. FPA development in young children shows a spontaneous shift towards moderate external rotation (age 2-4), whereby in-toeing <= 1-5 degrees can be present, but can return to normal. Bilateral in-toeing after the age of four and unilateral in-toeing after the age of seven should be monitored.
AIM To analyze neuromuscular activity patterns of the trunk in healthy controls (H) and back pain patients (BPP) during one-handed lifting of light to heavy loads. METHODS RESULTS Seven subjects (3m/4f; 32 +/- 7 years; 171 +/- 7 cm; 65 +/- 11 kg) were assigned to BPP (pain grade >= 2) and 36 (13m/23f; 28 +/- 8 years; 174 +/- 10 cm; 71 +/- 12 kg) to H (pain grade <= 1). H and BPP did not differ significantly in anthropometrics (P > 0.05). All subjects were able to lift the light and middle loads, but 57% of BPP and 22% of H were not able to lift the heavy load (all women) chi(2) analysis revealed statistically significant differences in task failure between H vs BPP (P = 0.03). EMG-RMS ranged from 33% +/- 10%/30% +/- 9% (DL, 1 kg) to 356% +/- 148%/283% +/- 80% (VR, 20 kg) in H/BPP with no statistical difference between groups regardless of load (P > 0.05). However, the EMG-RMS of the VR was greatest in all lifting tasks for both groups and increased with heavier loads. CONCLUSION Heavier loading leads to an increase (2-to 3-fold) in trunk muscle activity with comparable patterns. Heavy loading (20 kg) leads to task failure, especially in women with back pain.
Trunk loading and back pain
(2017)
An essential function of the trunk is the compensation of external forces and loads in order to guarantee stability. Stabilising the trunk during sudden, repetitive loading in everyday tasks, as well as during performance is important in order to protect against injury. Hence, reduced trunk stability is accepted as a risk factor for the development of back pain (BP). An altered activity pattern including extended response and activation times as well as increased co-contraction of the trunk muscles as well as a reduced range of motion and increased movement variability of the trunk are evident in back pain patients (BPP). These differences to healthy controls (H) have been evaluated primarily in quasi-static test situations involving isolated loading directly to the trunk. Nevertheless, transferability to everyday, dynamic situations is under debate. Therefore, the aim of this project is to analyse 3-dimensional motion and neuromuscular reflex activity of the trunk as response to dynamic trunk loading in healthy (H) and back pain patients (BPP).
A measurement tool was developed to assess trunk stability, consisting of dynamic test situations. During these tests, loading of the trunk is generated by the upper and lower limbs with and without additional perturbation. Therefore, lifting of objects and stumbling while walking are adequate represents. With the help of a 12-lead EMG, neuromuscular activity of the muscles encompassing the trunk was assessed. In addition, three-dimensional trunk motion was analysed using a newly developed multi-segmental trunk model. The set-up was checked for reproducibility as well as validity. Afterwards, the defined measurement set-up was applied to assess trunk stability in comparisons of healthy and back pain patients.
Clinically acceptable to excellent reliability could be shown for the methods (EMG/kinematics) used in the test situations. No changes in trunk motion pattern could be observed in healthy adults during continuous loading (lifting of objects) of different weights. In contrast, sudden loading of the trunk through perturbations to the lower limbs during walking led to an increased neuromuscular activity and ROM of the trunk. Moreover, BPP showed a delayed muscle response time and extended duration until maximum neuromuscular activity in response to sudden walking perturbations compared to healthy controls. In addition, a reduced lateral flexion of the trunk during perturbation could be shown in BPP.
It is concluded that perturbed gait seems suitable to provoke higher demands on trunk stability in adults. The altered neuromuscular and kinematic compensation pattern in back pain patients (BPP) can be interpreted as increased spine loading and reduced trunk stability in patients. Therefore, this novel assessment of trunk stability is suitable to identify deficits in BPP. Assignment of affected BPP to therapy interventions with focus on stabilisation of the trunk aiming to improve neuromuscular control in dynamic situations is implied. Hence, sensorimotor training (SMT) to enhance trunk stability and compensation of unexpected sudden loading should be preferred.
Background
Recently, the incidence rate of back pain (BP) in adolescents has been reported at 21%. However, the development of BP in adolescent athletes is unclear. Hence, the purpose of this study was to examine the incidence of BP in young elite athletes in relation to gender and type of sport practiced.
Methods
Subjective BP was assessed in 321 elite adolescent athletes (m/f 57%/43%; 13.2 ± 1.4 years; 163.4 ± 11.4 cm; 52.6 ± 12.6 kg; 5.0 ± 2.6 training yrs; 7.6 ± 5.3 training h/week). Initially, all athletes were free of pain. The main outcome criterion was the incidence of back pain [%] analyzed in terms of pain development from the first measurement day (M1) to the second measurement day (M2) after 2.0 ± 1.0 year. Participants were classified into athletes who developed back pain (BPD) and athletes who did not develop back pain (nBPD). BP (acute or within the last 7 days) was assessed with a 5-step face scale (face 1–2 = no pain; face 3–5 = pain). BPD included all athletes who reported faces 1 and 2 at M1 and faces 3 to 5 at M2. nBPD were all athletes who reported face 1 or 2 at both M1 and M2. Data was analyzed descriptively. Additionally, a Chi2 test was used to analyze gender- and sport-specific differences (p = 0.05).
Results
Thirty-two athletes were categorized as BPD (10%). The gender difference was 5% (m/f: 12%/7%) but did not show statistical significance (p = 0.15). The incidence of BP ranged between 6 and 15% for the different sport categories. Game sports (15%) showed the highest, and explosive strength sports (6%) the lowest incidence. Anthropometrics or training characteristics did not significantly influence BPD (p = 0.14 gender to p = 0.90 sports; r2 = 0.0825).
Conclusions
BP incidence was lower in adolescent athletes compared to young non-athletes and even to the general adult population. Consequently, it can be concluded that high-performance sports do not lead to an additional increase in back pain incidence during early adolescence. Nevertheless, back pain prevention programs should be implemented into daily training routines for sport categories identified as showing high incidence rates.
Background
Recently, the incidence rate of back pain (BP) in adolescents has been reported at 21%. However, the development of BP in adolescent athletes is unclear. Hence, the purpose of this study was to examine the incidence of BP in young elite athletes in relation to gender and type of sport practiced.
Methods
Subjective BP was assessed in 321 elite adolescent athletes (m/f 57%/43%; 13.2 ± 1.4 years; 163.4 ± 11.4 cm; 52.6 ± 12.6 kg; 5.0 ± 2.6 training yrs; 7.6 ± 5.3 training h/week). Initially, all athletes were free of pain. The main outcome criterion was the incidence of back pain [%] analyzed in terms of pain development from the first measurement day (M1) to the second measurement day (M2) after 2.0 ± 1.0 year. Participants were classified into athletes who developed back pain (BPD) and athletes who did not develop back pain (nBPD). BP (acute or within the last 7 days) was assessed with a 5-step face scale (face 1–2 = no pain; face 3–5 = pain). BPD included all athletes who reported faces 1 and 2 at M1 and faces 3 to 5 at M2. nBPD were all athletes who reported face 1 or 2 at both M1 and M2. Data was analyzed descriptively. Additionally, a Chi2 test was used to analyze gender- and sport-specific differences (p = 0.05).
Results
Thirty-two athletes were categorized as BPD (10%). The gender difference was 5% (m/f: 12%/7%) but did not show statistical significance (p = 0.15). The incidence of BP ranged between 6 and 15% for the different sport categories. Game sports (15%) showed the highest, and explosive strength sports (6%) the lowest incidence. Anthropometrics or training characteristics did not significantly influence BPD (p = 0.14 gender to p = 0.90 sports; r2 = 0.0825).
Conclusions
BP incidence was lower in adolescent athletes compared to young non-athletes and even to the general adult population. Consequently, it can be concluded that high-performance sports do not lead to an additional increase in back pain incidence during early adolescence. Nevertheless, back pain prevention programs should be implemented into daily training routines for sport categories identified as showing high incidence rates.
Introduction
Injury prevention programs (IPPs) are an inherent part of training in recreational and professional sports. Providing performance-enhancing benefits in addition to injury prevention may help adjust coaches and athletes’ attitudes towards implementation of injury prevention into daily routine. Conventional thinking by players and coaches alike seems to suggest that IPPs need to be specific to one’s sport to allow for performance enhancement. The systematic literature review aims to firstly determine the IPPs nature of exercises and whether they are specific to the sport or based on general conditioning. Secondly, can they demonstrate whether general, sports-specific or even mixed IPPs improve key performance indicators with the aim to better facilitate long-term implementation of these programs?
Methods
PubMed and Web of Science were electronically searched throughout March 2018. The inclusion criteria were randomized control trials, publication dates between Jan 2006 and Feb 2018, athletes (11–45 years), injury prevention programs and included predefined performance measures that could be categorized into balance, power, strength, speed/agility and endurance. The methodological quality of included articles was assessed with the Cochrane Collaboration assessment tools.
Results
Of 6619 initial findings, 22 studies met the inclusion criteria. In addition, reference lists unearthed a further 6 studies, making a total of 28. Nine studies used sports specific IPPs, eleven general and eight mixed prevention strategies. Overall, general programs ranged from 29–57% in their effectiveness across performance outcomes. Mixed IPPs improved in 80% balance outcomes but only 20–44% in others. Sports-specific programs led to larger scale improvements in balance (66%), power (83%), strength (75%), and speed/agility (62%).
Conclusion
Sports-specific IPPs have the strongest influence on most performance indices based on the significant improvement versus control groups. Other factors such as intensity, technical execution and compliance should be accounted for in future investigations in addition to exercise modality.
The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of a 6-week sensorimotor or resistance training on maximum trunk strength and response to sudden, high-intensity loading in athletes. Interventions showed no significant difference for maximum strength in concentric and eccentric testing (p>0.05). For perturbation compensation, higher peak torque response following SMT (Extension: +24Nm 95%CI +/- 19Nm; Rotation: + 19Nm 95%CI +/- 13Nm) and RT (Extension: +35Nm 95%CI +/- 16Nm; Rotation: +5Nm 95%CI +/- 4Nm) compared to CG (Extension: -4Nm 95%CI +/- 16Nm; Rotation: -2Nm 95%CI +/- 4Nm) was present (p<0.05).
Background: Core-specific sensorimotor exercises are proven to enhance neuromuscular activity of the trunk, improve athletic performance and prevent back pain. However, the dose-response relationship and, therefore, the dose required to improve trunk function is still under debate. The purpose of the present trial will be to compare four different intervention strategies of sensorimotor exercises that will result in improved trunk function. Discussion: The results of the study will be clinically relevant, not only for researchers but also for (sports) therapists, physicians, coaches, athletes and the general population who have the aim of improving trunk function.