A prospective comparison of lower extremity kinematics and kinetics between injured and non-injured collegiate cross country runners

Dudley, Robert; Pamukoff, Derek N.; Lynn, Scott K.; Kersey, Robert D.; Noffal, Guillermo J.

doi:10.1016/j.humov.2017.02.007

Cited by 41 publications

(73 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Together, this suggests that kinematics in the frontal and transverse plane exhibit larger measurement error than the sagittal plane. This has important implications for studies examining knee adduction moments, a loading pattern suggested as a risk factor for running-related injuries (Dudley, Pamukoff, Lynn, Kersey, & Noffal, 2017).…”

Section: Accepted Manuscriptmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measurement error of 3D kinematic and kinetic measures during overground endurance running in recreational runners between two test sessions separated by 48 h

Stoneham

Barry

Saxby³

et al. 2019

Physiol. Meas.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Accepted Manuscriptmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measurement error of 3D kinematic and kinetic measures during overground endurance running in recreational runners between two test sessions separated by 48 h

Stoneham

Barry

Saxby³

et al. 2019

Physiol. Meas.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Absolute differences have been reported in biomechanical studies, although these differences are normally between injury groups and not between exposure groups (Ceyssens et al 2019;Powers 2010). In prospective cohort studies, the most common analytical approach has been to compare differences in biomechanical measures, such as external knee adduction moments (Dudley et al 2017), ankle eversion range of motion and eversion velocity (Kuhman et al 2016), and hip strength (Finnoff et al 2011), between injured and non-injured runners. Studies identifying such differences give some information on possible risk factors.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Associations between biomechanical and clinical/anthropometrical factors and running-related injuries among recreational runners: a 52-week prospective cohort study

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The purpose of this exploratory study was to investigate whether runners with certain biomechanical or clinical/anthropometrical characteristics sustain more running-related injuries than runners with other biomechanical or clinical/anthropometrical characteristics. Methods: The study was designed as a prospective cohort with 52-weeks follow-up. A total of 224 injury-free, recreational runners were recruited from the Gothenburg Half Marathon and tested at baseline. The primary exposure variables were biomechanical and clinical/anthropometrical measures, including strength, lower extremity kinematics, joint range of motion, muscle flexibility, and trigger points. The primary outcome measure was any running-related injury diagnosed by a medical practitioner. Cumulative risk difference was used as measure of association. A shared frailty approach was used with legs as the unit of interest. A total of 448 legs were included in the analyses. Results: The cumulative injury incidence proportion for legs was 29.0% (95%CI = 24.0%; 34.8%). A few biomechanical and clinical/anthropometrical factors influence the number of running-related injuries sustained in recreational runners. Runners with a late timing of maximal eversion sustained 20.7% (95%CI = 1.3; 40.0) more injuries, and runners with weak abductors in relation to adductors sustained 17.3% (95%CI = 0.8; 33.7) more injuries, compared with the corresponding reference group. Conclusions: More injuries are likely to occur in runners with late timing of maximal eversion or weak hip abductors in relation to hip adductors.

show abstract

“…Variables attributed to increased risk of RRI include poor nutrition habits, excessive training volume, history of past injury, poor lower extremity biomechanical characteristics of the athlete such as excessive knee internal rotation during running. 4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12 Several of these factors are modifiable and can be addressed and corrected with the proper strategies. For example, Fredericson et al demonstrated a reduction in iliotibial band syndrome symptoms after a hip abductor strengthening program.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance Motion Analysis Unable to Predict Running-Related Injury in Collegiate Distance Runners

Melgares¹,

Fry²,

Sanchez³

2019

JSMAHS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Running-related injury (RRI) is common among competitive collegiate distance runners who participate in the sport of cross country and long distance track and field. Many factors contribute to RRI. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine if a 3D motion capture system's performance motion analysis (PMA) report is capable of identifying factors predictive of RRI among collegiate distance runners during a cross country season. Methods: Thirty-one collegiate cross country runners (17 male, 14 female, mean age = 20.5 ± 1.4 years) gave their consent to participate in the investigation. Subjects were screened in the motion capture system and provided with PMA reports assessing their movement quality using several variables (composite score, power, strength, dysfunction, and vulnerability, based on measurements of 192 kinetic and kinematic variables). The athletes were then monitored throughout their 13-week competitive season for incidence of RRI. At the end of the season, participants were sorted into injured (n=17) and uninjured (n=14) groups. Injury was defined as appearing on the team injury report as missing or being limited in practice or competition for a week or more, in accordance with prior RRI research. Each sex was also separated into groups based on injury status. Results: Independent samples t-tests. Conclusion: The findings identified in this prospective study suggest that the movement screen was unable to identify runners at risk of injury. Future investigations isolating lower extremity movement characteristics in runners may prove more effective at predicting RRI.

show abstract

A prospective comparison of lower extremity kinematics and kinetics between injured and non-injured collegiate cross country runners

Cited by 41 publications

References 33 publications

Measurement error of 3D kinematic and kinetic measures during overground endurance running in recreational runners between two test sessions separated by 48 h

Measurement error of 3D kinematic and kinetic measures during overground endurance running in recreational runners between two test sessions separated by 48 h

Associations between biomechanical and clinical/anthropometrical factors and running-related injuries among recreational runners: a 52-week prospective cohort study

Performance Motion Analysis Unable to Predict Running-Related Injury in Collegiate Distance Runners

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About