Whole body kinematics and knee moments that occur during an overhead catch and landing task in sport

A Review of Recent Perspectives on Biomechanical Risk Factors Associated with Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury

“…Initial findings examining relationships between frontal and transverse plane motion of the trunk with frontal plane loading of the knee when in single limb stance show some association between these variables. Chaudhari et al (2005) report that preventing weight from moving over the plant leg through constraining arm movement may increase knee valgus loading in cutting whereas Dempsey et al (2012) report a significant positive correlation between trunk lateral flexion towards landing leg and knee valgus moment during single leg landing. Furthermore, Frank et al (2013) reported increased knee varus moments were associated with limited trunk rotation away from the stance limb and towards the direction of travel during a cutting task.…”

“…the moment arm of the trunk), increased trunk flexion is likely to increase the moment due to the trunk about Biomechanical Risk Factors Associated with ACL Injury 199 the hip but decrease the moment due to the trunk about the knee (Blackburn & Padua, 2009). Due to these factors, recent research examining lower extremity biomechanical risk factors associated with ACL injury has therefore focused on the influence of trunk load and trunk motion (Blackburn & Padua, 2009;Chaudhari, Hearn, & Andriacchi, 2005;Dempsey, Elliott, Munro, Steele, & Lloyd, 2012;Janssen, Sheppard, Dingley, Chapman, & Spratford, 2012;Kulas et al, 2010;Kulas, Zalewski, Hortobagyi, & Devita, 2008;Nagano, Ida, Akai, & Fukubayashi, 2011;Shimokochi, Ambegaonkar, Meyer, Lee, & Shultz, 2013). A summary of the reported effects of trunk flexion and trunk loading on lower extremity biomechanics during landing/cutting manoeuvres is shown in Table 1.…”

Biomechanical and Neuromuscular Characteristics of Male Athletes: Implications for the Development of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury Prevention Programs

“…More recently, Dempsey et al [25] investigated both kinematics and kinetics of the hip, knee, and ankle joints in male team athletes performing overhead catch and landing tasks. The interesting aspect of this study was the demonstration of the differences in knee kinetics depending on the type of catch before landing.…”

“…At increasing vertical height, the authors found a positive correlation with peak posterior GRF. At increasing horizontal height, the authors found a Table 1 Summary of biomechanical and neuromuscular evidence potentially related to aberrant knee mechanics in male athletes Sport Findings Joint kinetics Soccer Cutting maneuvers higher varus-valgus and internal-external knee moments than running (no differences in flexion-extension knee moments) [13] Side-step cutting elicited knee flexion, valgus, and IR loads, and crossover cutting elicits knee flexion, varus, and ER loads [13] Cutting maneuvers elicited higher foot loading in the medial aspect, and sprinting higher loading in the first and second ray [34] Basketball During side-step cutting, higher peak stance knee valgus moment was associated with higher initial contact hip flexion and IR, and knee valgus position [66] Soccer and basketball No longitudinal changes in peak knee abduction moments at landing in pubertal and post-pubertal athletes [40] Basketball and hockey Players wearing knee braces landed with lower peak vertical GRF compared with subjects without knee brace [80] American football Artificial turf higher peak pressures within central forefoot and lesser toes than natural grass, but the latter higher relative load within medial forefoot and lateral mid-foot [38] Australian football Ankle taping reduced knee IR and varus moments during running and side-step cutting in planned and unplanned situations [87] Combination Foot wide and torso towards the opposite direction of the side-step cut (technique modification) increased knee valgus and IR moment [27] Foot internally rotated during side-step cutting elicited lower flexion/extension moments compared with foot wide technique [27] Increased knee valgus at landing if the ball to catch is moving towards the preferred landing leg [25] Landing with foot and knee ER, hip abduction and IR, and lateral flexion of the trunk is associated with higher knee valgus and IR loads [25] Single-leg landing or increasing landing height produced higher peak GRF [5,105] Increasing landing height produced greater knee power and work [5] In single-leg landing, hip and ankle were the main energy dissipaters in sagittal plane, and knee the main energy dissipater in the frontal plane [106] In double-leg landing, hip and knee were the main energy dissipaters in sagittal plane, and hip the main energy dissipater in the frontal plane [106] In the frontal plane, single-leg landing had greater knee range of motion, moment, and energy dissipation compared with double-leg landing [106] Peak vertical and posterior GRF increased with greater vertical height at landing....…”

An alternative approach to describing agility in sports through establishment of a relationship between velocity and radius of curvature

“…Such relationships between some parameters of sports movements have been commonly obtained through analysis of movement kinematics using motion analysis systems (Dempsey, Elliott, Munro, Steele, & Lloyd, 2012;McLean, Walker, & van den Bogert, 2005). Maximum velocity and acceleration of the athlete during an agility drill using motion analysis systems has, for example, been investigated in a study (Draper & Lancaster, 1985).…”