Background: Artistic competitive gymnastics results in a wide, unique spectrum of injuries. Due to the high number of injuries and the current lack of research related to pre-competitive testing in adolescent gymnasts, it is crucial to find a method to predict the likelihood of an athlete sustaining an in-season injury. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to 1) describe the frequency and type of pre-season and in-season injuries, 2) determine if there were differences in physical performance tests between those who had a lower extremity (LE) injury in-season and those who did not, and 3) determine if there were differences in age, level, sex, BMI, sport modifications, previous injury, and current injury between those who had a LE injury and those who didn’t. Methods: Thirty-seven adolescent gymnasts (average age: 12.81 years) were included with levels ranging from 5 (novice) to 10 (elite). Participants (15 males and 22 females) were surveyed for previous and current injury. The athletes completed a performance battery before the competition season including: Lower Quarter Y-Balance Test (LQYBT), Closed Kinetic Chain dorsiflexion (CKCDF), single hop (SH), triple hop (TH), and the Functional Movement Screen (FMS). Follow-up data was collected at the end of the competitive season for comparison. The data was analyzed using descriptive methods and comparative analyses including chi-square and independent t-tests with an alpha level set at .05. Results: Sixty-five percent reported an injury in the last year and seventy-eight percent reported pre-season injuries at testing day. The most common location for pre-season injury was the ankle/foot (24% and 31% respectively). There were no differences between injured and non-injured athletes when comparing asymmetries in CKCDF, LQYBT posteromedial or posterolateral reach, hop testing, or FMS. The LQYBT-anterior scores were significantly different at p=.049 between the injured versus uninjured groups, with 91% of the in-season injury group having a difference <4cm. Similarly, the LQYBT-composite score using a cut-off of 95% was significant at p=.043 with those >95% category being more likely to get injured. There were no significant differences in demographic information comparing injury occurrence. Conclusion: The tested physical performance battery may be useful in tracking gymnasts over time, but may not be beneficial in forecasting injuries in a sport with high percentages of acute injuries. The collected injury volume may not be reflective of a standard season as COVID-19 decreased the number of competitions. Additional research to identify athletes at risk for injury requires further investigation.
Is consumer behaviour towards footwear predisposing for lower extremity injuries in runners and walkers? A prospective study
