Search

Athletes with a history of concussion are at a greater risk for lower extremity musculoskeletal injury. Female athletes may be at an even greater risk than male athletes. Previous researchers on postconcussion landing biomechanics have focused on the lower extremities, but the trunk plays a crucial role as an injury risk factor. To compare lower extremity and trunk biomechanics during jump-landing and cutting maneuvers between female athletes with and those without a concussion history. Cross-sectional study. Biomechanics laboratory. A total of 26 athletes (mean ± SD age = 19.0 ± 1.3 years, height = 1.68 ± 0.07 m, mass = 64.02 ± 6.76 kg, body mass index = 22.58 ± 1.97 kg/m2; median [interquartile range] time since most recent concussion = 37.5 months [25.0 months, 65.8 months]) with a concussion history and 38 athletes (age = 19.0 ± 1.1 years, height = 1.71 ± 0.08 m, mass = 64.72 ± 9.45 kg, body mass index = 22.14 ± 1.80 kg/m2) without a concussion history. Peak kinetics (vertical ground reaction force, vertical loading rate, external knee-abduction moment, and external knee-flexion moment) and kinematics (trunk-flexion angle, trunk lateral-bending angle, ankle-dorsiflexion angle, knee-flexion angle, knee-abduction angle, and hip-flexion angle) were obtained during the eccentric portion of jump-landing and cutting tasks. Separate 2 (group) × 2 (limb) between- and within-factors analyses of covariance were used to compare outcomes between groups. We covaried for time since the most recent concussion and the limb that had a history of musculoskeletal injury. Athletes with a concussion history displayed a greater peak knee-abduction angle in their nondominant limb than their dominant limb (P =.01, ηp2 = 0.107) and the nondominant limb of athletes without a concussion history (P =.02, ηp2 = 0.083) during jump landing. They also had less trunk lateral bending during cutting compared with athletes without a concussion history (P =.005, ηp2 = 0.126). Our results indicated landing biomechanics are different between female athletes with and those without a concussion history. This finding may be due to impairments in neuromuscular control postconcussion that may ultimately increase the risk of subsequent lower extremity injury, although further research is warranted given the cross-sectional nature of our study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: It is unclear if lower-extremity joint cooling alters biomechanics during a functional movement. Objective: To investigate the effects of unilateral lower-extremity cryotherapy on movement alterations during a single-leg drop jump. Design: A crossover design. Setting: Laboratory. Patients: Twenty healthy subjects (10 males and 10 females; 23 y, 169 cm, 66 kg). Intervention(s): Subjects completed a single-leg drop jump before and after a 20-minute ankle or knee joint cooling on the right leg, or control (seated without cooling) on 3 separate days. Main outcome measures: Time to peak knee flexion, vertical ground reaction force, lower-extremity joint angular velocity (sagittal plane only), and angle and moment (sagittal and frontal planes) in the involved leg over the entire ground contact (GC; from initial contact to jump-off) during the first landing. Time to peak knee flexion was compared using an analysis of variance; the rest of the outcome measures were analyzed using functional analyses of variance (P < .05). Results: Neither joint cooling condition changed the time to peak knee flexion (F2,95 = 0.73, P = .49). Ankle joint cooling reduced vertical ground reaction force (55 N at 4% of GC), knee joint angular velocity (44°/s during 5%-9% of GC), and knee varus moment (181 N·m during 18%-20% of GC). Knee joint cooling resulted in a reduction in knee joint angular velocity (24°/s during 37%-40% of GC) and hip adduction moment (151 N·m during 46%-48% of GC), and an increase in hip joint angular velocity (16°/s during 49%-53% of GC) and plantarflexion angle (1.5° during 11%-29% of GC). Conclusion: Resuming activity immediately after lower-extremity joint cooling does not seem to predispose an individual to injury during landing because altered mechanics are neither overlapping with the injury time period nor of sufficient magnitude to lead to an injury. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent evidence suggests previously concussed athletes are at greater risk for lower-extremity (LE) injuries than are controls. However, little is known regarding the influence of sports-related concussion (SRC) on landing biomechanics that may provide a mechanistic rationale for LE injury risk. The purpose of this investigation was to examine LE drop-landing biomechanics in adolescent athletes with and without a previous SRC history. Participants included 10 adolescent athletes with an SRC history and 11 controls from multiple sports. Three-dimensional kinematic and kinetic data associated with LE injury risk were analyzed across 5 trials for 30- and 60-cm landing heights. Multivariate analyses indicated group differences in landing patterns from the 30- (P = .041) and 60-cm (P = .015) landing heights. Follow-up analyses indicated that concussed adolescent athletes demonstrated significantly less ankle dorsiflexion and knee flexion versus controls when performing drop landings. Our findings suggest that previously concussed adolescent athletes complete drop-landing maneuvers with ankle and knee joint kinematic patterns that suggest greater risk for LE injury.While limitations such as sport variety and explicit LE injury history are present, the results of this study provide a possible biomechanical rationale for the association between SRC and LE injury risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND Lower limb asymmetries may be associated with increased injury risk in an active female population. However, an appropriate method for determining these asymmetries has not been established. HYPOTHESIS/PURPOSE The purpose of the present study was to examine the single leg drop landing (SLD) kinematic waveforms of female recreational athletes for the pelvis, hip, and knee using statistical parametric mapping (SPM). It was hypothesized that individual bilateral differences would be masked by the group analysis. STUDY DESIGN Descriptive Laboratory Study. METHODS The current study examined the sagittal and frontal plane pelvis, hip, and knee kinematics of nine physically active females during a SLD. To better elucidate whether asymmetries were present between right and left limbs throughout the landing phase, data were analyzed with SPM. The time-series data were comprised from initial contact to the bottom of the landing. A single subject design was also included to account for potential interindividual variability. RESULTS At the group level there were no statistical differences between the right and left limbs of participants for all variables. The single subject design yielded at least two significant asymmetries for all participants. Six out of the nine participants had bilateral differences for all six kinematic time-series. CONCLUSIONS The lack of significant differences at the group level may have been masked by movement variability amongst participants. For example, when considering participants with significant differences for hip flexion, four participants had greater values on the left limb and three on the right. A similar observation was made for knee flexion where three participants had significantly greater kinematic values on the left versus four on the right. Until a method is developed to adequately dichotomize lower extremities during the SLD task, a single subject design strategy be used with group analysis when making bilateral comparisons. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Individuals with mechanical ankle instability (MAI) and functional ankle instability (FAI) present with residual movement dysfunctions after an initial lateral ankle sprain. This study investigated leg stiffness control to determine how behavioural characteristics between MAI and FAI differ during single-leg drop landing movement. Methods: Thirty individuals (10 with MAI, 10 with FAI, and 10 healthy controls) participated in this study. During single-leg drop landing movement, we estimated dimensionless leg stiffness, peak vertical force (PVF), change in the displacement of leg movement, loading rate, angular joint movement, and internal joint moment for impaired and unimpaired legs, respectively. Univariate one-way analysis of variance was used for each dependent variable across leg conditions. Results: The MAI group had lower dimensionless leg stiffness with greater change in the displacement of leg movement for the impaired leg than the FAI and control groups. Moreover, reduced leg stiffness was associated with greater hip joint flexion movement in the MAI group, whereas ankle dorsiflexion movement increased to decrease the leg stiffness in the FAI and control groups. Conclusion: These findings indicate that lower leg stiffness in the MAI group than in the FAI group may be attributed to compensatory actions to minimise reliance on their ankle movement after landing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examined the effect of wearing time on comfort perception and landing biomechanics of basketball shoes with different midsole hardness. Fifteen basketball players performed drop landing and layup first step while wearing shoes of different wearing time (new, 2-, 4-, 6- and 8-week) and hardness (soft, medium and hard). Two-way ANOVA with repeated measures was performed on GRF, ankle kinematic and comfort perception variables. Increased wearing time was associated with poorer force attenuation and comfort perception during landing activities (p < 0.05). The new shoes had significantly smaller forefoot (2- and 4-week) and rearfoot peak GRF impacts (all time conditions) in drop landing and smaller rearfoot peak GRF impact (6- and 8-week) in layup; shoes with 4-week of wearing time had significantly better perceptions of forefoot cushioning, forefoot stability, rearfoot cushioning, rearfoot stability and overall comfort than the new shoes (p < 0.05). Compared with hard shoes, the soft shoes had better rearfoot cushioning but poorer forefoot cushioning (p < 0.05). Shoe hardness and wearing time would play an influential role in GRF and comfort perception, but not in ankle kinematics. Although shoe cushioning performance would decrease even after a short wearing period, the best comfort perception was found at 4-week wearing time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Several tasks have been used to examine landing biomechanics for evaluation and rehabilitation, especially as related to anterior cruciate ligament injuries. However, comparing results among studies in which different tasks were used can be difficult, and it is unclear which task may be most appropriate. Objective: To compare lower extremity biomechanics across 5 commonly used landing tasks. Design: Descriptive laboratory study. Setting: University-operated US Air Force Special Operations Forces human performance research laboratory. Patients or Other Participants: A total of 65 US Air Force Special Tactics Operators (age ± 27.7 6 5.0 years, height ± 176.5 6 5.7 cm, mass ± 83.1 6 9.1 kg). Intervention(s): Kinematic and kinetic analysis of doubleand single-legged drop landing, double- and single-legged stop jump, and forward jump to single-legged landing. Main Outcome Measure(s): Hip-, knee-, and ankle-joint kinematics; knee-joint forces and moments; and ground reaction forces (GRFs) were the dependent measures. We used repeated-measures analyses of variance or Friedman tests, as appropriate, to assess within-subject differences across tasks. Results: Peak vertical GRF and peak knee-flexion angle were different among all tasks (P , .001). Single-legged landings generated higher vertical GRF (v2 ± 244.68, P , .001) and lower peak knee-flexion values (F4,64 ± 209.33, P , .001) except for forward jump to single-legged landing, which had the second highest peak vertical GRF and the lowest peak knee-flexion value. The single-legged drop landing generated the highest vertical (v2 ± 244.68, P , .001) and posterior (v2 ± 164.46, P , .001) GRFs. Peak knee-valgus moment was higher during the double-legged drop landing (v2 ± 239.63, P , .001) but similar for all others. Conclusions: Different landing tasks elicited different biomechanical responses; no single task was best for assessing a wide range of biomechanical variables related to anterior cruciate ligament injuries. Therefore, depending on the goals of the study, using multiple assessment tasks should be considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although landing in a plantarflexion and inversion position is a well-known characteristic of lateral ankle sprains, the associated kinematics of the knee and hip is largely unknown. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine the changes in knee and hip kinematics during landings on an altered landing surface of combined plantarflexion and inversion. Participants performed five drop landings from 30 cm onto a trapdoor platform in three different conditions: flat landing surface, 25° inversion, or a combined 25° plantarflexion and 25° inversion. Kinematic data were collected using a seven camera motion capture system. A 2 × 3 (leg × surface) repeated measures ANOVA was used for statistical analysis. The combined surface showed decreased knee and hip flexion range of motion (ROM) and increased knee abduction ROM (p < 0.05). The altered landing surface creates a stiff landing pattern where reductions in sagittal plane motion are transferred to the frontal plane, resulting in increased knee abduction. A stiff landing pattern is frequently related to increased risk of anterior cruciate ligament injury. It may be beneficial for athletes at risk to train for alternate methods of increasing their sagittal plane motion of the knee and hip with active knee or trunk flexion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: People with chronic ankle instability (CAI) exhibit less weight-bearing dorsiflexion range of motion (ROM) and less knee flexion during landing than people with stable ankles. Examining the relationship between dorsiflexion ROM and landing biomechanics may identify a modifiable factor associated with altered kinematics and kinetics during landing tasks. Objective: To examine the relationship between weightbearing dorsiflexion ROM and single-legged landing biomechanics in persons with CAI. Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting: Laboratory. Patients or Other Participants: Fifteen physically active persons with CAI (5 men, 10 women; age = 21.9 ± 2.1 years, height = 168.7 ± 9.0 cm, mass = 69.4 ± 13.3 kg) participated. Intervention(s): Participants performed dorsiflexion ROM and single-legged landings from a 40-cm height. Sagittal-plane kinematics of the lower extremity and ground reaction forces (GRFs) were captured during landing. Main Outcome Measure(s): Static dorsiflexion was measured using the weight-bearing-lunge test. Kinematics of the ankle, knee, and hip were observed at initial contact, maximum angle, and sagittal displacement. Sagittal displacements of the ankle, knee, and hip were summed to examine overall sagittal displacement. Kinetic variables were maximum posterior and vertical GRFs normalized to body weight. We used Pearson product moment correlations to evaluate the relationships between dorsiflexion ROM and landing biomechanics. Correlations (r) were interpreted as weak (0.00-0.40), moderate (0.41- 0.69), or strong (0.70-1.00). The coefficient of determination (r²) was used to determine the amount of explained variance among variables. Results: Static dorsiflexion ROM was moderately correlated with maximum dorsiflexion (r = 0.49, r² = 0.24), ankle displacement (r = 0.47, r² = 0.22), and total displacement (r = 0.67, r² = 0.45) during landing. Dorsiflexion ROM measured statically and during landing demonstrated moderate to strong correlations with maximum knee (r = 0.69-0.74, r² = 0.47-0.55) and hip (r = 0.50-0.64, r² = 0.25-0.40) flexion, hip (r = 0.53- 0.55, r² = 0.28-0.30) and knee (r = 0.53-0.70, r² = 0.28-0.49) displacement, and vertical GRF (-0.47- -0.50, r² = 0.22-0.25). Conclusions: Dorsiflexion ROM was moderately to strongly related to sagittal-plane kinematics and maximum vertical GRF during single-legged landing in persons with CAI. Persons with less dorsiflexion ROM demonstrated a more erect landing posture and greater GRF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]