Search

Research examining the effects of spinal cord injury on sexuality has largely focused on physiological functioning and quantification of dysfunction following injury. This paper reports a systematic review of qualitative research that focused on the views and experiences of people with spinal cord injury on sex and relationships. The review addressed the following research question: What are the views and experiences of people with spinal cord injury of sex, sexuality and relationships following injury? Five databases were relevant and employed in the review: CINAHL (1989–2016 only), PsychInfo, PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science, for research published between 1 January 1980 and 30 November 2019. After removing duplicates, 257 records remained and were screened using a two-stage approach to inclusion and quality appraisal. Following screening, 27 met the criteria for inclusion and are reported in the paper. The review includes studies from fifteen countries across five continents. Two main approaches to data analysis summary and thematic synthesis were undertaken to analyze the qualitative data reported in the papers. The analysis revealed four main themes: sexual identity; significant and generalized others, sexual embodiment; and; sexual rehabilitation and education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Rugby Union has one of the highest reported incidences of match injuries amongst all professional team sports. The majority of research within this field has focused on elite male cohorts; in this study we present the first meta-analytic review of these data. Objective: The aim of this study was to summarise the incidence and severity of injuries in senior men's professional Rugby Union, and determine the overall effects of level of play, new versus recurrent injuries, playing position, type of injuries, location of injuries, severity of injuries, period of match, and injury incident. Methods: Electronic databases were searched using keywords 'Rugby Union' and 'inj*'. Fifteen papers addressing injuries in senior men's professional Rugby Union (from 1995 through September 2012) were included in the review. A maximum of ten of these papers provided incidence data that could be modelled via a Poisson mixed-effects generalised linear model, while up to nine studies provided severity data that could be modelled via a general linear mixed model. Magnitude based inferences were used to assess differences between factors. A descriptive analysis was provided for studies that could not be included in the pooled analysis due to incongruent injury definitions. Results: The overall incidence of injuries in senior men's professional Rugby Union matches was 81 per 1,000 player hours (95 % CI 63-105), and 3 per 1,000 player hours (95 % CI 2-4) during training. Estimated mean severity for match injuries was 20 days (95 % CI 14-27), and 22 days (95 % CI 19-24) for training injuries. A higher level of play was associated with a greater incidence of injuries in matches, with no clear difference in severity. New injuries occurred substantially more often than recurrent injuries, while the severity of recurrent injuries was, on average, 10 days (95 % CI 4-17) greater than new injuries. Trivial differences were found in injury incidence and severity between forwards and backs. Muscle/tendon and joint (non-bone)/ligament injuries were the two most prevalent injury groups, whereas fractures and bone stress injuries had the highest average severity. The lower limb was the body region with the highest injury incidence, while upper limb injuries were most severe. The third quarter (40-60 min) of matches had the highest injury rate, and injuries most commonly occurred as a result of being tackled. Conclusions: This meta-analysis confirms match injury incidence rates in professional Rugby Union can be considered high in comparison with other team sports, but similar to other collision sports. In order to markedly reduce overall injury burden, efforts should target lower-limb injury prevention strategies and technique during contact, as these may render the largest effect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Targeting specific time periods of the day or week may enhance physical activity (PA) interventions in youth. The most prudent time segments to target are currently unclear. Objectives: To systematically review the literature describing differences in young people's objectively measured PA on weekdays vs. weekends, in school vs. out of school, weekends vs. out of school and lesson time vs. break time. Methods: Electronic databases were searched for English-language, cross-sectional studies of school-aged children (4-18 years) reporting time-segment-specific accelerometer-measured PA from 01/1990 to 01/2013. We meta-analysed standardised mean differences (SMD) between time segments for mean accelerometer counts per minute (TPA) and minutes in moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA). SMD is reported in units of standard deviation; 0.2, 0.5 and 0.8 represent small, moderate and large effects. Heterogeneity was explored using meta-regression (potential effect modifiers: age, sex and study setting). Results: Of the 54 included studies, 37 were eligible for meta-analyses. Children were more active on weekdays than weekends [pooled SMD (95 % CI) TPA 0.14 (0.08; 0.20), MVPA 0.42 (0.35; 0.49)]. On school days, TPA was lower in school than out of school; however, marginally more MVPA was accumulated in school [TPA −0.24 (−0.40; −0.08), MVPA 0.17 (−0.03; 0.38)]. TPA was slightly lower on weekends than out of school on school days, but a greater absolute volume of MVPA was performed on weekends [TPA −0.10 (−0.19; −0.01), MVPA 1.02 (0.82; 1.23)]. Heterogeneity between studies was high ( I 73.3-96.3 %), with 20.3-53.1 % of variance between studies attributable to potential moderating factors. Conclusions: School-aged children are more active on weekdays than weekend days. The outcome measure influences the conclusions for other comparisons. Findings support the tailoring of intervention strategies to specific time periods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Alongside its role in athletic conditioning, stretching has commonly been integrated in warm-up routines prior to athletic performance. Numerous studies have reported detrimental acute effects on strength following stretching. Consequently, athletes have been recommended to discontinue stretching as part of warm-ups. In contrast, studies indicate that chronic stretching performed as a separate bout from training or competition may enhance performance. However, the influence of stretching on complex performances has received relatively little attention. Objective: The purpose of this study was to review both the acute and chronic effects of stretching on performances involving the stretch-shortening cycle (SSC). Methods: A systematic search for literature was undertaken (January 2006-December 2012) in which only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or studies with repeated measures designs were included. The Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) rating scale was used for quality assessment of the evidence. Results: The review included 43 studies, from which conflicting evidence emerged. Approximately half of the studies assessing the acute effect of static stretching reported a detrimental effect on performance, while the remainder found no effect. In contrast, dynamic stretching showed no negative effects and improved performance in half of the trials. The effect size associated with static and dynamic stretching interventions was commonly low to moderate, indicating that the effect on performance might be limited in practice. Factors were identified that might have contributed to the conflicting results reported across studies, such as type of SSC performance and carrying out dynamic activity between the stretching bout and performance. Few studies since 2006 have addressed the chronic effect of stretching on functional and sports performance. Although negative effects were not reported, robust evidence of the overall beneficial effects within current bibliographic databases remains elusive. Plausible mechanisms for the observed effects from stretching are discussed, as well as possible factors that may have contributed to contradictory findings between studies. Limitations: Considerable heterogeneity in study design and methods makes comparison between studies challenging. No regression analysis of the contribution of different predictors to variation between trials had previously been performed. Hence, predictors had to be selected on the basis of a qualitative analysis of the predictors that seemed most influential, as well as being identified in previous narrative reviews. Conclusion: Different types of stretching have differential acute effects on SSC performances. The recommended volume of static stretching required to increase flexibility might induce a negative acute effect on performances involving rapid SSCs, but the effect sizes of these decrements are commonly low, indicating that the acute effect on performance might be limited in practice. No negative acute effects of dynamic stretching were reported. For athletes that require great range of motion (ROM) and speed in their sport, long-term stretching successfully enhances flexibility without negatively affecting performance. Acute dynamic stretching may also be effective in inducing smaller gains in ROM prior to performance without any negative effects being observed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]