Background Plyometric training involves dynamic activities such as hopping, jumping, skipping, and bounding, and is used to improve dynamic muscle performance. The study aims to determine the effects of a 3-week plyometric training program on the explosive strength (standing broad jump [SBJ]), speed (30-meter sprint), and agility (t-test) of badminton players. Methods The study recruited 102 eligible subjects who were randomly divided into two groups (51 per group). Both groups were initially tested for agility, speed, and strength. Thereafter, the experimental group underwent the plyometric exercise program twice per week for 3 weeks with a 2-day recovery period in between sessions. During the 3 weeks, the control group continued its routine exercise without plyometric training. After 3 weeks, the study tested both groups for agility, speed, and strength. Results The agility of the experimental group after plyometric training (pre = 10.51±0.35 vs. post = 9.74±0.39 s) was significantly improved [t (100) = 9.941, p < 0.001] compared with the control group (10.65±0.29 vs. 10.53±0.33 s). Performance in terms of speed was significantly increased [t (100) = 4.675, p < 0.001] for the experimental group (pre = 4.58±0.35 vs. post = 4.06±0.45 s) compared with the control group (pre = 4.62±0.29 vs. post = 4.47±0.34 s). The experimental group (pre = 181.17±6.05 vs. post = 178.30±5.97 s) exhibited a substantial improvement [t (100) = 4.95, p < 0.001] in terms of explosive power compared with that of the control group (pre = 183.02±3.89 vs. post = 183.88±3.91 s). Conclusion The findings emphasize the benefits of plyometric training in increasing the performance level required during movements in badminton. Plyometrics can help badminton players enhance their agility, speed, and explosive power.

INTRODUÇÃO: Cefaleias tensionais podem ser induzidas pela postura da cabeça para frente, e há uma grande quantidade de evidências disponíveis para o manejo de cefaleias crônicas. Os dados suportam o uso de abordagens de terapia manual para gerenciar dores de cabeça do tipo tensional. Devido à postura anterior da cabeça, a região do músculo suboccipital torna-se curta, resultando em aumento da lordose e dor no pescoço. Pacientes com uma postura de cabeça ainda mais para frente têm um ângulo craniovertebral menor, o que por sua vez causa cefaléia do tipo tensional. OBJETIVO: O objetivo deste estudo é comparar os efeitos da terapia de liberação miofascial (MFR) e técnica de energia muscular (MET) com exercícios gerais do pescoço no ângulo crânio-vertebral e cefaleia em pacientes com cefaleia tensional. MÉTODOS: No total, 75 indivíduos com cefaléia do tipo tensional e sensibilidade muscular suboccipital foram recrutados e randomizados cegamente em três grupos: o grupo MFR, o grupo MET e o grupo controle (25 indivíduos em cada grupo). Um ângulo pré-craniovertebral foi obtido por método fotográfico e um questionário de índice de incapacidade pré-cefaléia foi preenchido. O grupo MFR recebe liberação crânio-basal na região suboccipital com exercícios de pescoço, o grupo MET recebe relaxamento pós-isométrico na região suboccipital região com exercícios, e o grupo controle recebe apenas exercícios por 2 semanas. Após duas semanas, o ângulo pós-craniano e o questionário de cefaleia foram coletados e medidos. RESULTADOS: O ângulo craniovertebral e o índice de cefaleia mostraram melhora significativa nos grupos MET e MFR. Não houve diferença significativa quando os grupos MET e MFR foram comparados. Quando comparados com o grupo controle, tanto o MET quanto o MFR apresentaram aumento significativo do ângulo craniovertebral. Houve melhora significativa no índice de cefaleia após MET, MFR ou exercício de rotina no pescoço. CONCLUSÃO: Comparado ao grupo controle, o MFR apresenta melhores resultados do que o MET no ângulo craniovertebral e cefaleia.

INTRODUCTION: Tension headaches can be induced by forward head posture, and there is a wealth of evidence available for managing chronic headaches. The data supports the use of manual therapy approaches to manage tension type headaches. Because of the forward head posture, the suboccipital muscle region becomes short, resulting in an increase in lordosis and neck pain. Patients with an even more forward head posture have a smaller cranio-vertebral angle, which in turn causes tension type headache. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to compare the effects of Myofascial release therapy(MFR) and Muscle energy technique(MET) with general neck exercises on the cranio-vertebral angle and headache in tension type headache patients. METHODS: In total, 75 subjects with tension type headache and suboccipital muscle tenderness were recruited and randomized blindly into three groups: the MFR group, the MET group, and the control group (25 subjects in each group). A pre-craniovertebral angle was taken by photographic method, and a pre-headache disability index questionnaire was filled in. The MFR group receives cranio-basal release in the suboccipital region with neck exercises, the MET group receives post–isometric relaxation in the suboccipital region with exercises, and the control group receives only exercises for 2 weeks. After two weeks, the postcranial angle and the headache questionnaire were taken and measured. RESULTS: Craniovertebral angle and headache index showed significant improvement in both the MET and MFR groups. There was no significant difference when MET and MFR groups were compared. When compared with the control group, both MET and MFR showed a significant increase in craniovertebral angle. There was significant improvement in the headache index following MET, MFR, or routine neck exercise. CONCLUSION: Compared to the control group, MFR shows better results than MET on craniovertebral angle and headache.

Background: Nonspecific lower back pain (NSLBP) is described as pain that is not caused by an identifiable, well-known disease, such as infection, tumor, osteoporosis, fracture, structural deformity, inflammatory condition, radicular syndrome, or cauda equina syndrome. Aim: The aim of this study was to determine the effect of EMG-guided trunk stabilization exercises on functional disability associated with LBP. Materials and Methods: A single-blinded pre- and post-test experimental comparative design was used for this study. Fifty individuals with chronic NSLBP were screened for inclusion criteria. Of these, forty were randomly grouped into the EMG group receiving trunk-stability exercises with electromyography biofeedback and non-EMG group receiving trunk-stabilization exercises without EMG biofeedback. Participants performed five trunk-stability exercises 3 days a week for 4 weeks. The intensity of pain, range of motion, functional disability, and balance were measured at baseline and after 4 weeks. Results: Both techniques indicated a significant effect on chronic NSLBP; however, trunk-stability exercises combined with EMG biofeedback produced better results in alleviating the intensity of pain, increasing the range of motion, and improving functional disabilities and static balance. Conclusion: The present study confirms that trunk-stability exercises with EMG biofeedback can be practiced safely, contributes to a greater boost in neuromuscular efficiency in the lumbar flexors and extensors, and is effective in modifying functional disability for patients with NSLBP.