g olf is an athletic activity enjoyed by people of all ages and skill levels. There are more than 55 million golfers around the world, and the number of participants is increasing worldwide. 9Because golf is not an intense activity, it is especially suitable for older people to stay active and improve their health. Among golf injuries, low back pain (LBP) is the most common complaint for t STuDY DeSign: Controlled laboratory study using a cross-sectional design.t oBJeCTiVeS: To examine the kinematics and kinetics of the trunk and the physical characteristics of trunk and hip in golfers with and without a history of low back pain (LBP).t BaCKgroUnD: Modified swing patterns and general exercises have been suggested for golfers with back pain. Yet we do not know what contributes to LBP in golfers. To create and validate a low back-specific exercise program to help prevent and improve back injuries in golfers, it may be valuable to understand the differences in biomechanical and physical characteristics of golfers with and without a history of LBP.t meThoDS: Sixteen male golfers with a history of LBP were matched by age and handicap with 16 male golfers without a history of LBP. All golfers underwent a biomechanical swing analysis, trunk and hip strength and flexibility assessment, spinal proprioception testing, and postural stability testing.t reSUlTS: The group with a history of LBP demonstrated significantly less trunk extension strength at 60°/s and left hip adduction strength, as well as limited trunk rotation angle toward the nonlead side. No significant differences were found in postural stability, trunk kinematics, and maximum spinal moments during the golf swing.t ConClUSion: Deficits observed in this study may affect a golfer's ability to overcome the spinal loads generated during the golf swing over time. Exercises for improving these physical deficits can be considered, although the cause-effect of LBP in golfers still cannot be determined.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

BackgroundScientific data on the performance of collegiate female tennis players during the menstrual phases are scarce.Trial designDouble-blind, counter-balanced, crossover trials were conducted to examine whether tennis performance was affected during menstruation, with and without dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate (DHEA-S) supplementation.MethodsTen Division 1 collegiate tennis players (aged 18–22 years) were evenly assigned into placebo-supplemented and DHEA-supplemented (25 mg/day) trials. Treatments were exchanged among the participants after a 28-day washout. Tennis serve performance was assessed on the first day of menstrual bleeding (day 0/28) and on days 7, 14 and 21.ResultsMood state was unaltered during the menstrual cycles in both trials. The lowest tennis serve performance score (speed times accuracy) occurred on day 14 (P=0.06 vs day 0; P=0.01 vs day 21) in both placebo and DHEA trials. Decreased performance on day 14 was explained by decreased accuracy (P=0.03 vs day 0/28; P=0.01 vs day 21), but not velocity itself. Isometric hip strength, but not quadriceps strength, was moderately lower on day 14 (P=0.08). Increasing plasma DHEA-S (by ~65%) during the DHEA-supplemented trial had no effects on mood state, sleep quality or tennis serve performance.ConclusionWe have shown that menses does not affect serve performance of collegiate tennis players. However, the observed decrement in the accuracy of serve speed near ovulation warrants further investigation.