Background:Sport specialization and movement asymmetry have been separately discussed as potential risk factors for lower extremity injury. Early specialization may lead to the development of movement asymmetries that can predispose an athlete to injury, but this has not been thoroughly examined.Hypothesis:Athletes rated as specialized would exhibit greater between-limb anterior reach asymmetry and decreased anterior reach distance on the Y-balance test (YBT) as compared with nonspecialized high school athletes, and these differences would not be dependent on sex.Study Design:Cross-sectional study.Level of Evidence:Level 3.Methods:Two hundred ninety-five athletes (117 male, 178 female; mean age, 15.6 ± 1.2 years) from 2 local high schools participating in basketball, soccer, volleyball, and tennis responded to a questionnaire regarding sport specialization status and performed trials of the YBT during preseason testing. Specialization was categorized according to 3 previously utilized specialization classification methods (single/multisport, 3-point scale, and 6-point scale), and interactions between specialization and sex with Y-balance performance were calculated using 2-way analyses of variance.Results:Single-sport male athletes displayed greater anterior reach asymmetry than other interaction groups. A consistent main effect was observed for sex, with men displaying greater anterior asymmetry and decreased anterior reach distance than women. However, the interaction effects of specialization and sex on anterior Y-balance performance varied based on the classification method used.Conclusion:Single-sport male athletes displayed greater anterior reach asymmetry on the YBT than multisport and female athletes. Specialization classification method is important because the 6- and 3-point scales may not accurately identify balance abnormalities. Male athletes performed worse than female athletes on both of the Y-balance tasks.Clinical Relevance:Clinicians should be aware that single-sport male athletes may display deficits in dynamic balance, potentially increasing their risk of injury.

Context Sport specialization has been defined as year-round intensive training in a single sport to the exclusion of other sports. A commonly used survey tool created by Jayanthi et al, which classifies athletes as having a low, moderate, or high level of specialization, categorizes only athletes answering yes to “Have you quit other sports to focus on a main sport?” as highly specialized. We hypothesized that a measureable number of year-round, single-sport athletes have never played other sports and, therefore, may be inaccurately classified as moderately specialized when using this tool, even though most experts would agree they should be viewed as highly specialized. Objective To determine the proportion of athletes misclassified as moderately rather than highly specialized because they never played a previous sport. Design Cross-sectional study. Setting Hospital-based pediatric outpatient sports medicine clinic. Patients or Other Participants Injured athletes aged 12 to 17 years who presented to the clinic between 2015 and 2017 and completed a sports-participation survey (n = 917). Main Outcome Measure(s) Sport-specialization level. Results Of 917 participants, 299 (32.6%) played a single sport more than 8 months per year, and 208/299 (69.6%) had previously quit other sports (highly specialized), whereas 91 (30.4%) had never played other sports (highly specialized and misclassified as moderate). Individual-sport athletes had a 2.03 times greater risk of being highly specialized and misclassified as moderate than team-sport athletes (relative risk = 2.03 [95% confidence interval = 1.37, 3.00]). Females had a 1.70 times greater risk of being misclassified as moderately specialized than males (relative risk 1.70 [95% confidence interval = 1.07, 2.70]). Of the 3 sports with the largest number of athletes, artistic gymnastics had the highest proportion (51.2%) who had never played other sports. Conclusions The commonly used specialization survey misclassified a substantial number of highly specialized athletes as moderately specialized. Researchers should consider adding a fourth survey question, “Have you only ever played 1 sport?” to identify and better study this unique subset of misclassified athletes.

Drawing as a form of analytical inscription can provide researchers with highly flexible methods for exploring embodied interaction. Graphical techniques can combine spatial layouts, trajectories of action and anatomical detail, as well as rich descriptions of movement and temporal effects. This paper introduces some of the possibilities and challenges of adapting graphical techniques from life drawing and still life for interaction research. We demonstrate how many of these techniques are used in interaction research by illustrating the postural configurations and movements of participants in a ballet class. We then discuss a prototype software tool that is being developed to support interaction analysis specifically in the context of a collaborative data analysis session.

No abstract