Refine
Document Type
- Article (9)
- Conference Proceeding (3)
- Postprint (3)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (16)
Keywords
- Young athletes (3)
- Injury (2)
- Pain occurrence (2)
- Training volume (2)
- back pain (2)
- trunk (2)
- Aftercare (1)
- Exercise therapy (1)
- Gesundheitsmonitoring (1)
- Home-based (1)
Institute
- Department Sport- und Gesundheitswissenschaften (16) (remove)
Background: Isokinetic measurements are widely used to assess strength capacity in a clinical or research context. Nevertheless, the validity of isokinetic measures for identifying strength deficits and the evaluation of therapeutic process regarding different pathologies is yet to be established. Therefore, the purpose of this review is to evaluate the validity of isokinetic measures in a specific case: that of muscular capacity in low back pain (LBP).
Methods: A literature search (PubMed; ISI Web of Knowledge; The Cochrane Library) covering the last 10 years was performed. Relevant papers regarding isokinetic trunk strength measures in healthy and patients with low back pain (PLBP) were searched. Peak torque values [Nm] and peak torque normalized to body weight [Nm/kg BW] were extracted for healthy and PLBP. Ranked mean values across studies were calculated for the concentric peak torque at 60 degrees/s as well as the flexion/extension (F/E) ratio.
Results: 34 publications (31 flexion/extension; 3 rotation) were suitable for reporting detailed isokinetic strength measures in healthy or LBP (untrained adults, adolescents, athletes). Adolescents and athletes were different compared to normal adults in terms of absolute trunk strength values and the F/E ratio. Furthermore, isokinetic measures evaluating therapeutic process and isokinetic rehabilitation training were infrequent in literature (8 studies).
Conclusion: Isokinetic measurements are valid for measuring trunk flexion/extension strength and F/E ratio in athletes, adolescents and (untrained) adults with/without LBP. The validity of trunk rotation is questionable due to a very small number of publications whereas no reliable source regarding lateral flexion could be traced. Therefore, isokinetic dynamometry may be utilized for identifying trunk strength deficits in healthy adults and PLBP.
Tendinopathies are frequently the cause of chronic, load-dependent complaints of the lower extremity. Commonly, the large tendons of the ankle and knee joints are affected, especially the Achilles and patellar tendons. Repeated overuse in sports and/or daily activities is assumed as the aetiology. Besides the clinical examination including a comprehensive anamnesis of pain and training/loading, sonographic imaging has a high training/loading relevance for the diagnosis of tendon pathologies of the lower extremity. Training concepts are considered in first line as the treatment of choice. A combination with physical therapy interventions can be useful. In cases of a more severe pathology and long-standing complaints multimodal therapeutic options should be employed. The use of surgical treatment procedures should only be taken into account in case of failed response to conservative treatment.
Background
Back pain patients (BPP) show delayed muscle onset, increased co-contractions, and variability as response to quasi-static sudden trunk loading in comparison to healthy controls (H). However, it is unclear whether these results can validly be transferred to suddenly applied walking perturbations, an automated but more functional and complex movement pattern. There is an evident need to develop research-based strategies for the rehabilitation of back pain. Therefore, the investigation of differences in trunk stability between H and BPP in functional movements is of primary interest in order to define suitable intervention regimes. The purpose of this study was to analyse neuromuscular reflex activity as well as three-dimensional trunk kinematics between H and BPP during walking perturbations.
Methods
Eighty H (31m/49f;29±9yrs;174±10cm;71±13kg) and 14 BPP (6m/8f;30±8yrs;171±10cm;67±14kg) walked (1m/s) on a split-belt treadmill while 15 right-sided perturbations (belt decelerating, 40m/s2, 50ms duration; 200ms after heel contact) were randomly applied. Trunk muscle activity was assessed using a 12-lead EMG set-up. Trunk kinematics were measured using a 3-segment-model consisting of 12 markers (upper thoracic (UTA), lower thoracic (LTA), lumbar area (LA)). EMG-RMS ([%],0-200ms after perturbation) was calculated and normalized to the RMS of unperturbed gait. Latency (TON;ms) and time to maximum activity (TMAX;ms) were analysed. Total motion amplitude (ROM;[°]) and mean angle (Amean;[°]) for extension-flexion, lateral flexion and rotation were calculated (whole stride cycle; 0-200ms after perturbation) for each of the three segments during unperturbed and perturbed gait. For ROM only, perturbed was normalized to unperturbed step [%] for the whole stride as well as the 200ms after perturbation. Data were analysed descriptively followed by a student´s t-test to account for group differences. Co-contraction was analyzed between ventral and dorsal muscles (V:R) as well as side right:side left ratio (Sright:Sleft). The coefficient of variation (CV;%) was calculated (EMG-RMS;ROM) to evaluate variability between the 15 perturbations for all groups. With respect to unequal distribution of participants to groups, an additional matched-group analysis was conducted. Fourteen healthy controls out of group H were sex-, age- and anthropometrically matched (group Hmatched) to the BPP.
Results
No group differences were observed for EMG-RMS or CV analysis (EMG/ROM) (p>0.025). Co-contraction analysis revealed no differences for V:R and Srigth:Sleft between the groups (p>0.025). BPP showed an increased TON and TMAX, being significant for Mm. rectus abdominus (p = 0.019) and erector spinae T9/L3 (p = 0.005/p = 0.015). ROM analysis over the unperturbed stride cycle revealed no differences between groups (p>0.025). Normalization of perturbed to unperturbed step lead to significant differences for the lumbar segment (LA) in lateral flexion with BPP showing higher normalized ROM compared to Hmatched (p = 0.02). BPP showed a significant higher flexed posture (UTA (p = 0.02); LTA (p = 0.004)) during normal walking (Amean). Trunk posture (Amean) during perturbation showed higher trunk extension values in LTA segments for H/Hmatched compared to BPP (p = 0.003). Matched group (BPP vs. Hmatched) analysis did not show any systematic changes of all results between groups.
Conclusion
BPP present impaired muscle response times and trunk posture, especially in the sagittal and transversal planes, compared to H. This could indicate reduced trunk stability and higher loading during gait perturbations.
Background
Back pain patients (BPP) show delayed muscle onset, increased co-contractions, and variability as response to quasi-static sudden trunk loading in comparison to healthy controls (H). However, it is unclear whether these results can validly be transferred to suddenly applied walking perturbations, an automated but more functional and complex movement pattern. There is an evident need to develop research-based strategies for the rehabilitation of back pain. Therefore, the investigation of differences in trunk stability between H and BPP in functional movements is of primary interest in order to define suitable intervention regimes. The purpose of this study was to analyse neuromuscular reflex activity as well as three-dimensional trunk kinematics between H and BPP during walking perturbations.
Methods
Eighty H (31m/49f;29±9yrs;174±10cm;71±13kg) and 14 BPP (6m/8f;30±8yrs;171±10cm;67±14kg) walked (1m/s) on a split-belt treadmill while 15 right-sided perturbations (belt decelerating, 40m/s2, 50ms duration; 200ms after heel contact) were randomly applied. Trunk muscle activity was assessed using a 12-lead EMG set-up. Trunk kinematics were measured using a 3-segment-model consisting of 12 markers (upper thoracic (UTA), lower thoracic (LTA), lumbar area (LA)). EMG-RMS ([%],0-200ms after perturbation) was calculated and normalized to the RMS of unperturbed gait. Latency (TON;ms) and time to maximum activity (TMAX;ms) were analysed. Total motion amplitude (ROM;[°]) and mean angle (Amean;[°]) for extension-flexion, lateral flexion and rotation were calculated (whole stride cycle; 0-200ms after perturbation) for each of the three segments during unperturbed and perturbed gait. For ROM only, perturbed was normalized to unperturbed step [%] for the whole stride as well as the 200ms after perturbation. Data were analysed descriptively followed by a student´s t-test to account for group differences. Co-contraction was analyzed between ventral and dorsal muscles (V:R) as well as side right:side left ratio (Sright:Sleft). The coefficient of variation (CV;%) was calculated (EMG-RMS;ROM) to evaluate variability between the 15 perturbations for all groups. With respect to unequal distribution of participants to groups, an additional matched-group analysis was conducted. Fourteen healthy controls out of group H were sex-, age- and anthropometrically matched (group Hmatched) to the BPP.
Results
No group differences were observed for EMG-RMS or CV analysis (EMG/ROM) (p>0.025). Co-contraction analysis revealed no differences for V:R and Srigth:Sleft between the groups (p>0.025). BPP showed an increased TON and TMAX, being significant for Mm. rectus abdominus (p = 0.019) and erector spinae T9/L3 (p = 0.005/p = 0.015). ROM analysis over the unperturbed stride cycle revealed no differences between groups (p>0.025). Normalization of perturbed to unperturbed step lead to significant differences for the lumbar segment (LA) in lateral flexion with BPP showing higher normalized ROM compared to Hmatched (p = 0.02). BPP showed a significant higher flexed posture (UTA (p = 0.02); LTA (p = 0.004)) during normal walking (Amean). Trunk posture (Amean) during perturbation showed higher trunk extension values in LTA segments for H/Hmatched compared to BPP (p = 0.003). Matched group (BPP vs. Hmatched) analysis did not show any systematic changes of all results between groups.
Conclusion
BPP present impaired muscle response times and trunk posture, especially in the sagittal and transversal planes, compared to H. This could indicate reduced trunk stability and higher loading during gait perturbations.
Professionelle GT Langstreckenmotorsportler (Rennfahrer) müssen den hohen motorischen und kognitiven Ansprüchen ohne Verlust der Performance während eines Rennens endgegenwirken können. Sie müssen stets, bei hoher Geschwindigkeit fokussiert und konzentriert auf ihr Auto, die Rennstrecke und ihre Gegner reagieren können. Darüber hinaus sind Rennfahrer zusätzlich durch die notwendige Kommunikation im Auto mit den Ingenieuren und Mechanikern in der Boxengasse gefordert. Daten über die tatsächliche Beanspruchung und häufig auftretende Beschwerden und/oder Verletzung von Profiathleten liegen kaum vor. Für eine möglichst gute Performance im Auto während eines Rennens ist es notwendige neben der körperlichen Beanspruchung auch die häufigen Krankheitsbilder zu kennen. Auf Basis dessen kann eine optimale Prävention oder notwendige Therapie zur möglichst schnellen Reintegration in den Sport abgeleitet und entwickelt werden. Die vorliegende Arbeit befasst sich durch ein regelmäßiges Gesundheitsmonitoring mit der Erfassung häufiger Beschwerden und oder Verletzungen im GT Langestreckenmotorsport zur Ableitung eines präventiven (trainingstherapeutischen) und therapeutischen Konzeptes. Darüber hinaus, soll über die Einschätzung der körperlichen Leistungsfähigkeit der Athleten, auf Basis der Beanspruchung im Rennfahrzeug ein mögliches Trainingskonzept in Abhängigkeit der Saison entwickelt werden.
Insgesamt wurden über 15 Jahre (2003-2017) 37 männliche Athleten aus dem GT Langstreckenmotorsport 353mal im Rahmen eines Gesundheitsmonitorings untersucht. Dabei wurden Athleten maximal 14 Jahre und mindestens 1 Jahr sportmedizinische betreut. Diese 2x im Jahr stattfindende Untersuchung beinhaltete im Wesentlichen eine sportmedizinische Untersuchung zur Einschätzung der Tauglichkeit für den Sport und die Erfassung der körperlichen Leistungsfähigkeit. Über das Gesundheitsmonitoring hinaus erfolgte die Betreuung zusätzlich an der Rennstrecke zur weiteren Erfassung der Beschwerden, Erkrankungen und Verletzungen der Athleten während ihrer sportartspezifischen Belastung. Zusammengefasst zeigen die Athleten geringe Prävalenzen und Inzidenzen der Krankheitsbilder bzw. Beschwerden. Ein Unterschied der Prävalenzen zeigt sich zwischen den Gesundheitsuntersuchungen und der Betreuung an der Rennstrecke. Die häufigsten Beschwerdebilder zeigen sich aus Orthopädie und Innerer Medizin. So sind Infekte der oberen Atemwege sowie Allergien neben Beschwerden der unteren Extremität und der Wirbelsäule am häufigsten. Demzufolge werden vorrangig physio- und trainingstherapeutische Konsequenzen abgeleitet. Eine medikamentöse Therapie erfolgt im Wesentlichen während der Rennbetreuung. Zur Reduktion der orthopädischen und internistischen Beschwerden sollten präventive Maßnahmen mehr betont werden. Die körperliche Leistungsfähigkeit zeigt im Wesentlichen über die Untersuchungsjahre eine stabile Performance für die Ausdauer-, Kraft und sensomotorische Leistungsfähigkeit. Die Ausdauerleistungsfähigkeit kann in Abhängigkeit der Sportartspezifik mit einer guten bis sehr guten Ausprägung definiert werden. Die Kraftleistungsfähigkeit und die sensomotorische Leistungsfähigkeit lassen sportartspezifische Unterschiede zu und sollte körpergewichtsbezogen betrachtet werden.
Ein sportmedizinisches und trainingstherapeutisches Konzept müsste demnach eine regelmäßige ärztlich-medizinische Untersuchung mit dem Fokus der Orthopädie, Inneren Medizin und Hals- Nasen-Ohren-Kunde beinhalten. Darüber hinaus sollte eine regelmäßige Erfassung der körperlichen Leistungsfähigkeit zur möglichst effektiven Ableitung von Trainingsinhalten oder Präventionsmaßnahmen berücksichtig werden. Auf Grundlage der hohen Reisetätigkeit und der ganzjährigen Saison könnte ein 1-2x jährlich stattfindendes Trainingslager, im Sinne eines Grundlagen- und Aufbautrainings zur Optimierung der Leistungsfähigkeit beitragen, das Konzept komplementieren. Zudem scheint eine ärztliche Rennbetreuung notwendig.
Mueller, J, Mueller, S, Stoll, J, Baur, H, and Mayer, F. Trunk extensor and flexor strength capacity in healthy young elite athletes aged 11-15 years. J Strength Cond Res 28(5): 1328-1334, 2014-Differences in trunk strength capacity because of gender and sports are well documented in adults. In contrast, data concerning young athletes are sparse. The purpose of this study was to assess the maximum trunk strength of adolescent athletes and to investigate differences between genders and age groups. A total of 520 young athletes were recruited. Finally, 377 (n = 233/144 M/F; 13 +/- 1 years; 1.62 +/- 0.11 m height; 51 +/- 12 kg mass; training: 4.5 +/- 2.6 years; training sessions/week: 4.3 +/- 3.0; various sports) young athletes were included in the final data analysis. Furthermore, 5 age groups were differentiated (age groups: 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 years; n = 90, 150, 42, 43, and 52, respectively). Maximum strength of trunk flexors (Flex) and extensors (Ext) was assessed in all subjects during isokinetic concentric measurements (60 degrees center dot s(-1); 5 repetitions; range of motion: 55 degrees). Maximum strength was characterized by absolute peak torque (Flex(abs), Ext(abs); N center dot m), peak torque normalized to body weight (Flex(norm), Ext(norm); N center dot m center dot kg(-1) BW), and Flex(abs)/Ext(abs) ratio (RKquot). Descriptive data analysis (mean +/- SD) was completed, followed by analysis of variance (alpha = 0.05; post hoc test [Tukey-Kramer]). Mean maximum strength for all athletes was 97 +/- 34 N center dot m in Flex(abs) and 140 +/- 50 N center dot m in Ext(abs) (Flex(norm) = 1.9 +/- 0.3 N center dot m center dot kg(-1) BW, Ext(norm) = 2.8 +/- 0.6 N center dot m center dot kg(-1) BW). Males showed statistically significant higher absolute and normalized values compared with females (p < 0.001). Flex(abs) and Ext(abs) rose with increasing age almost 2-fold for males and females (Flex(abs), Ext(abs): p < 0.001). Flex(norm) and Ext(norm) increased with age for males (p < 0.001), however, not for females (Flex(norm): p = 0.26; Ext(norm): p = 0.20). RKquot (mean +/- SD: 0.71 +/- 0.16) did not reveal any differences regarding age (p = 0.87) or gender (p = 0.43). In adolescent athletes, maximum trunk strength must be discussed in a gender- and age-specific context. The Flex(abs)/Ext(abs) ratio revealed extensor dominance, which seems to be independent of age and gender. The values assessed may serve as a basis to evaluate and discuss trunk strength in athletes.
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.
