Evaluation of Agreement Between Participant and Expert on Jump-Landing Characteristics During a 4-Week Intervention

2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (6) ◽  
pp. 536-540
Author(s):  
Hayley M. Ericksen ◽  
Brian Pietrosimone ◽  
Phillip A. Gribble ◽  
Abbey C. Thomas
Keyword(s):  
Injury Risk ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Ligament Injury ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Jump Landing ◽  
Landing Biomechanics ◽  
Lower Extremity Fracture ◽  
Biomechanical Changes

Context: Feedback is an important factor in interventions designed to reduce anterior cruciate ligament injury risk. Self-analysis feedback requires participants to self-critique their jump-landing mechanics; however, it is unknown if individuals can effectively self-analyze their own biomechanics and if this self-analysis agrees with observed biomechanical changes by an expert. Objective: To determine agreement between an expert and participants on biomechanical errors committed during 3 of 12 sessions, which were part of an intervention to change jump-landing biomechanics in healthy females. Design: Descriptive analysis. Setting: Research laboratory. Patients or Other Participants: Healthy recreationally active females with no history of lower-extremity fracture or surgery. Interventions: Participants completed a 4-week, 12-session feedback intervention. Each intervention session lasted approximately 15 minutes and included asking participants to perform 6 sets of 6 jumps off a 30-cm-high box placed 50% of their height away from the target landing area. Participants performed self-analysis feedback and received expert feedback on 7 different jump-landing criteria following each set of jumps. Main Outcome Measures: Data were coded, and agreement between the expert and the participant was assessed using Cohen’s unweighted kappa for sessions 1, 6, and 12. Results: There was agreement between the expert and participants for 0/7 criteria for session 1, 3/7 criteria for session 6, and 4/7 criteria for session 12. Conclusions: Participants demonstrated some agreement with the expert when evaluating their jump-landing biomechanics. Self-analysis feedback may not replace what an expert can provide; both types of feedback may be better used in conjunction to produce significant biomechanical changes. Changes made by the participant may not translate into biomechanical changes during a real-life game or practice situation. Future research should continue to investigate effective interventions to reduce injury risk.

A Biomechanical Comparison of Single-Leg Landing and Unplanned Sidestepping

2018 ◽  
Vol 39 (08) ◽  
pp. 636-645 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chamnan Chinnasee ◽  
Gillian Weir ◽  
Siriporn Sasimontonkul ◽  
Jacqueline Alderson ◽  
Cyril Donnelly
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Knee Joint ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury ◽  
Injury Risk ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Testing Procedure ◽  
Ligament Injury ◽  
Joint Moments ◽  
Jump Landing ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

AbstractUnplanned sidestepping and single-leg landing have both been used to screen athletes for injury risk in sport. The aim of this study was to directly compare the lower limb mechanics of three single-leg landing tasks and an unplanned sidestepping task. Thirteen elite female team sport athletes completed a series of non-contact single-leg drop landings, single-leg countermovement jumps, single-leg jump landings and unplanned sidestepping in a randomized counterbalanced design. Three dimensional kinematics (250 Hz) and ground reaction force (2,000 Hz) data with a participant specific lower limb skeletal model were used to calculate and compare hip, knee and ankle joint kinematics, peak joint moments, instantaneous joint power and joint work during the weight acceptance phase of each sporting task (α=0.05). Peak knee joint moments and relevant injury risk thresholds were used to classify each athlete's anterior cruciate ligament injury risk during unplanned sidestepping and single-leg jump landing. Results showed that peak joint moments, power and work were greater during the single-leg jump landing task when compared to the single-leg drop landings and single-leg countermovement jumps tasks. Peak frontal and sagittal plane knee joint moments, knee joint power, as well as hip and knee joint work were greater during unplanned sidestepping when compared to the landing tasks. Peak ankle joint moments, power and work were greater during the landing tasks when compared to unplanned sidestepping. For 4 of the 13 athletes tested, their anterior cruciate ligament injury risk classification changed depending on whether they performed an unplanned sidestepping or single-leg jump landing testing procedure. To summarize, a single-leg jump landing testing procedure places a larger mechanical on the ankle joint when compared to single-leg drop landings, single-leg countermovement jumps and unplanned sidestepping. An unplanned sidestepping testing procedure places a larger mechanical demand on the knee joint when compared to single-leg landing tasks. Both unplanned sidestepping and single-leg jump landing testing procedures are recommended for classifying an athlete's anterior cruciate ligament injury risk in sport.

Anterior cruciate ligament injury risk factors in football

2019 ◽  
Vol 59 (10) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gian Nicola Bisciotti ◽  
Karim Chamari ◽  
Emanuele Cena ◽  
Andrea Bisciotti ◽  
Alessandro Bisciotti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury ◽  
Injury Risk ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Ligament Injury ◽  
Injury Risk Factors ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

The effect of unloader knee braces on medial meniscal strain

2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 132-139 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mayank Kalra ◽  
Ryan Bakker ◽  
Sebastian S Tomescu ◽  
Anna M Polak ◽  
Micah Nicholls ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Injury Risk ◽  
Medial Meniscus ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Meniscal Tear ◽  
Compressive Force ◽  
Ligament Injury ◽  
Knee Braces ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

Background: A medial meniscal tear is a common knee injury, especially following an anterior cruciate ligament injury. Decreasing the compressive force on the medial meniscus during dynamic activities using an unloader knee brace could reduce meniscal strain, effectively reducing injury risk and/or severity. Objectives: To investigate the efficacy of two unloader knee braces on medial meniscus strain during dynamic activities in intact & deficient anterior cruciate ligament states. Study design: Combined in vivo/in vitro study. Methods: In vivo knee kinematics and muscle force profiles from a healthy individual performing single/doubleleg squats and walking motions were simulated on 10 cadaveric specimens using a dynamic knee simulator system. Simulations were performed on knees in unbraced and braced scenarios, with and without the anterior cruciate ligament. Anterior and posterior medial meniscal strains were measured. Results: Two different braces each showed a significant reduction in the posteromedial meniscal strain ( p ⩽ 0.01) in an intact anterior cruciate ligament state. Neither brace mirrored this result for the anteromedial strain ( p > 0.05). In the deficient anterior cruciate ligament state, the braces had no significant effect on strain ( p > 0.05). Conclusion: Two unloader knee braces effectively reduced strain in the medial meniscus with an intact anterior cruciate ligament during dynamic activities. Neither brace made a significant reduction in strain for anterior cruciate ligament-deficient knees. Clinical relevance Unloader knee braces could be used to reduce the medial meniscus strain following meniscal surgery and during rehabilitation in patients with an isolated medial meniscus injury. However, these braces cannot be recommended for this purpose in patients with an anterior cruciate ligament deficiency.

Examining the Relationship Between a Neuromuscular Control Baseline Battery for Sport-Related Concussion and Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury Risk

Neurology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 98 (1 Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. S21.2-S22
Author(s):  
Ryan Moran
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Neuromuscular Control ◽  
Ligament Injury ◽  
Jump Landing ◽  
Eyes Closed ◽  
Eyes Open ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
The Relationship

ObjectiveTo examine the relationship between the m-CTSIB and Landing Error Scoring System in a sample of collegiate female athletes.BackgroundRecent literature has linked concussion and neuromuscular deficits in the lower extremity after injury. Neuromuscular control is frequently assessed using balance measures for concussion, but also dynamically to identify anterior cruciate ligament injury (ACL) risk via jump-landing movement screening.Design/MethodsThirty-nine healthy, collegiate female soccer (n = 22) and volleyball (n = 17) athletes completed the modified-Clinical Test of Sensory Interaction of Balance (m-CTSIB) and the Landing Error Scoring System (LESS). Measures consisted of total m-CTSIB sway index scores on individual conditions (firm surface eyes open [condition 1] and eyes closed [2], foam surface eyes open [3] and eyes closed [4]), m-CTSIB overall score, and total LESS errors. LESS scores were also categorized into a low (0–4 errors) and high (5 + errors) risk to determine if athletes with worse neuromuscular control on the LESS has worse balance on the m-CTSIB. A Spearman's rank-order correlation was conducted to determine the strength of the relationship between LESS and m-CTSIB performance. A series of Mann-Whitney U test were performed to determine differences between low and high LESS performance on m-CTSIB performance.ResultsThere was a weak, negative correlation between LESS and m-CTSIB performance (rs(37) = −0.153, p = 0.35). Further, there were no differences between the low and high risk LESS groups on sway index scores on conditions 1 (U = 158.5, p = 0.39), 2 (U = 156.0, p = 0.36), 3 (U = 165.5, p = 0.51), or 4 (U = 128.5, p = 0.08), as well as overall m-CTSIB scores (U = 150.5, p = 0.28).ConclusionsThere appears to be a lack of relationship between the LESS and m-CTSIB tests, revealing the independence of static and dynamic lower extremity neuromuscular function. Athletes who may be more at risk for ACL injury due to abnormal jump-landing biomechanics, do not differ from low-risk athletes on baseline balance assessment.

Optimizing Whole-Body Kinematics During Single-Leg Jump Landing to Reduce Peak Abduction/Adduction and Internal Rotation Knee Moments: Implications for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury Risk

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Dhruv Gupta ◽  
Jeffrey A. Reinbolt ◽  
Cyril J. Donnelly
Keyword(s):  
Internal Rotation ◽  
Injury Risk ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Injury ◽  
Whole Body ◽  
Jump Landing ◽  
Peak Knee ◽  
Knee Abduction ◽  
Acl Injury Risk ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

Knee abduction/adduction moment and knee internal rotation moment are known surrogate measures of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) load during tasks like sidestepping and single-leg landing. Previous experimental literature has shown that a variety of kinematic strategies are associated or correlated with ACL injury risk; however, the optimal kinematic strategies needed to reduce peak knee moments and ACL injury are not well understood. To understand the complex, multifaceted kinematic factors underpinning ACL injury risk and to optimize kinematics to prevent the ACL injury, a musculoskeletal modeling and simulation experimental design was used. A 14-segment, 37-degree-of-freedom, dynamically consistent skeletal model driven by force/torque actuators was used to simulate whole-body single-leg jump landing kinematics. Using the residual reduction algorithm in OpenSim, whole-body kinematics were optimized to reduce the peak knee abduction/adduction and internal/external rotation moments simultaneously. This optimization was repeated across 30 single-leg jump landing trials from 10 participants. The general optimal kinematic strategy was to bring the knee to a more neutral alignment in the transverse plane and frontal plane (featured by reduced hip adduction angle and increased knee adduction angle). This optimized whole-body kinematic strategy significantly reduced the peak knee abduction/adduction and internal rotation moments, transferring most of the knee load to the hip.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document