The aim of this study was to compare bone density and body composition measurements in women participating in elitelevel netball and golf, two sports with contrasting loading characteristics. Bone mineral density (BMD) and body composition were measured using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in 14 state-level netball players (20.893.4 years), 11 single-digit handicap golf players (22.492.1 years) and a control group (n 018) not training for sport (22.693.6 years). Trunk extensor endurance and grip strength were also measured using the Sorensen test and hand-grip dynamometry respectively. Netball players had significantly higher total body, lumbar spine and hip BMD than the golf players (P B 0.001) and control subjects (P B 0.001). The golf players had higher BMD than the control subjects only in the lumbar spine (P B 0.05). The netball players were significantly taller than the golf players and control group (P B 0.01) and had a higher body mass than the control group (P B 0.001). After adjustment for body height and mass, the BMD values in the netball players remained significantly higher than the control subjects at all sites (P B 0.01), while the golf players had significantly higher lumbar spine BMD than the controls (P B 0.05). Elite-level netball participation is associated with increased total body, hip and lumbar spine BMD, while this response was only evident in the lumbar spine in elite golf players. The contrasting loading characteristics of these sports may be reflected in the site-specific differences in BMD when compared to non-athletic control subjects.
Background Wearable sensor technology may allow accurate monitoring of spine movement outside a clinical setting. The concurrent validity of wearable sensors during multiplane tasks, such as lifting, is unknown. This study assessed DorsaVi Version 6 sensors for their concurrent validity with the Vicon motion analysis system for measuring lumbar flexion during lifting. Methods Twelve participants (nine with, and three without back pain) wore sensors on T12 and S2 spinal levels with Vicon surface markers attached to those sensors. Participants performed 5 symmetrical (lifting from front) and 20 asymmetrical lifts (alternate lifting from left and right). The global-T12-angle, global-S2-angle and the angle between these two sensors (relative-lumbar-angle) were output in the sagittal plane. Agreement between systems was determined through-range and at peak flexion, using multilevel mixed-effects regression models to calculate root mean square errors and standard deviation. Mean differences and limits of agreement for peak flexion were calculated using the Bland Altman method. Results For through-range measures of symmetrical lifts, root mean squared errors (standard deviation) were 0.86° (0.78) at global-T12-angle, 0.90° (0.84) at global-S2-angle and 1.34° (1.25) at relative-lumbar-angle. For through-range measures of asymmetrical lifts, root mean squared errors (standard deviation) were 1.84° (1.58) at global-T12-angle, 1.90° (1.65) at global-S2-angle and 1.70° (1.54) at relative-lumbar-angle. The mean difference (95% limit of agreement) for peak flexion of symmetrical lifts, was − 0.90° (-6.80 to 5.00) for global-T12-angle, 0.60° (-2.16 to 3.36) for global-S2-angle and − 1.20° (-8.06 to 5.67) for relative-lumbar-angle. The mean difference (95% limit of agreement) for peak flexion of asymmetrical lifts was − 1.59° (-8.66 to 5.48) for global-T12-angle, -0.60° (-7.00 to 5.79) for global-S2-angle and − 0.84° (-8.55 to 6.88) for relative-lumbar-angle. Conclusion The root means squared errors were slightly better for symmetrical lifts than they were for asymmetrical lifts. Mean differences and 95% limits of agreement showed variability across lift types. However, the root mean squared errors for all lifts were better than previous research and below clinically acceptable thresholds. This research supports the use of lumbar flexion measurements from these inertial measurement units in populations with low back pain, where multi-plane lifting movements are assessed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.