Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (33)
- Conference Proceeding (1)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (35) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (35)
Keywords
- strength training (3)
- ACL (2)
- Exercise (2)
- Low back pain (2)
- Motor control (2)
- Randomized controlled trials (2)
- Rehabilitation (2)
- Sports and exercise medicine (2)
- Strength training (2)
- accelerometry (2)
Institute
Adapting movements rapidly to unanticipated external stimuli is paramount for athletic performance and to prevent injuries. We investigated the effects of a 4-week open-skill choice-reaction training intervention on unanticipated jump-landings. Physically active adults (n = 37; mean age 27, standard deviation 2.7 years, 16 females, 21 males) were randomly allocated to one of two interventions or a control group (CG). Participants in the two intervention groups performed a 4-week visuomotor open skill choice reaction training, one for the upper and one for the lower extremities. Before and after the intervention, two different types of countermovement jumps with landings in split stance position were performed. In the (1) pre-planned condition, we informed the participants regarding the landing position (left or right foot in front position) before the jump. In the (2) unanticipated condition, this information was displayed after take-off (350–600 ms reaction time before landing). Outcomes were landing stability [peak vertical ground reaction force (pGRF) and time to stabilization (TTS)], and landing-related decision-making quality (measured by the number of landing errors). To measure extremity-specific effects, we documented the number of correct hits during the trained drills. A two-factorial (four repeated measures: two conditions, two time factors; three groups) ANCOVA was carried out; conditions = unanticipated versus pre-planned condition, time factors = pre versus post measurement, grouping variable = intervention allocation, co-variates = jumping time and self-report arousal. The training improved performance over the intervention period (upper extremity group: mean of correct choice reaction hits during 5 s drill: +3.0 hits, 95% confidence interval: 2.2–3.9 hits; lower extremity group: +1.6 hits, 0.6–2.6 hits). For pGRF (F = 8.4, p < 0.001) and landing errors (F = 17.1, p < 0.001) repeated measures effect occurred. Significantly more landing errors occurred within the unanticipated condition for all groups and measurement days. The effect in pGRF is mostly impacted by between-condition differences in the CG. No between-group or interaction effect was seen for these outcomes: pGRF (F = 0.4, p = 0.9; F = 2.3, p = 0.1) landing errors (F = 0.5, p = 0.6; F = 2.3, p = 0.1). TTS displayed a repeated measures (F = 4.9, p < 0.001, worse values under the unanticipated condition, improvement over time) and an interaction effect (F = 2.4, p = 0.03). Healthy adults can improve their choice reaction task performance by training. As almost no transfer to unanticipated landing successfulness or movement quality occurred, the effect seems to be task-specific. Lower-extremity reactions to unanticipated stimuli may be improved by more specific training regimens.
Objective: To investigate the feasibility, reliability, and validity of the Modified forward hop (MFH) test in participants after ACL reconstruction (ACLR).
Design: Reliability study.
Setting: Assessments were administered at different clinical locations in Germany and Switzerland by the same 2 investigators.
Participants: Forty-eight active individuals participated in this study (N=48).
Main Outcome Measures: The participants performed MFHs and Forward hops for distance in a predetermined order. The feasibility of the MFH was quantified with proportions of successfully executed attempts and Pearson's χ2 test. Its reliability was estimated using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and standard error of measurement (SEM). Test validity was explored using Pearson's product moment correlation analyses.
Results: Fewer failed attempts were recorded among the participants (age: 30 [Standard deviation 11] years; 22 women, 26 (13) months post-surgery) when compared with the Forward hop for distance test (25/288 trials; 9% vs 72/288 trials; 25%). Within-session ICC values were excellent (>0.95) for both types of Forward hop tests, independent of the side examined. The SEM values were comparable between the Modified (injured: 5.6 cm, uninjured: 5.9 cm) and the classic Forward hop (injured: 4.3 cm, uninjured: 7.2 cm).
Conclusion: The MFH is a feasible, reliable, and valid tool for judging neuromuscular performance after ACLR. If the aim of a hop for distance incorporates enhanced perceived or real landing safety, landing on both feet should be used.
Exercise is a treatment option in peripheral artery disease (PAD) patients to improve their clinical trajectory, at least in part induced by collateral growth. The ligation of the femoral artery (FAL) in mice is an established model to induce arteriogenesis. We intended to develop an animal model to stimulate collateral growth in mice through exercise. The training intensity assessment consisted of comparing two different training regimens in C57BL/6 mice, a treadmill implementing forced exercise and a free-to-access voluntary running wheel. The mice in the latter group covered a much greater distance than the former pre- and postoperatively. C57BL/6 mice and hypercholesterolemic ApoE-deficient (ApoE-/-) mice were subjected to FAL and had either access to a running wheel or were kept in motion-restricting cages (control) and hind limb perfusion was measured pre- and postoperatively at various times. Perfusion recovery in C57BL/6 mice was similar between the groups. In contrast, ApoE-/- mice showed significant differences between training and control 7 d postoperatively with a significant increase in pericollateral macrophages while the collateral diameter did not differ between training and control groups 21 d after surgery. ApoE-/- mice with running wheel training is a suitable model to simulate exercise induced collateral growth in PAD. This experimental set-up may provide a model for investigating molecular training effects.
Stabilization exercise (SE) is evident for the management of chronic non-specific low back pain (LBP). The optimal dose-response-relationship for the utmost treatment success is, thus, still unknown. The purpose is to systematically review the dose-response-relationship of stabilisation exercises on pain and disability in patients with chronic non-specific LBP. A systematic review with meta-regression was conducted (Pubmed, Web of Knowledge, Cochrane). Eligibility criteria were RCTs on patients with chronic non-specific LBP, written in English/German and adopting a longitudinal core-specific/stabilising/motor control exercise intervention with at least one outcome for pain intensity and/or disability. Meta-regressions (dependent variable = effect sizes (Cohens d) of the interventions (for pain and for disability), independent variable = training characteristics (duration, frequency, time per session)), and controlled for (low) study quality (PEDro) and (low) sample sizes (n) were conducted to reveal the optimal dose required for therapy success. From the 3,415 studies initially selected, 50 studies (n = 2,786 LBP patients) were included. N = 1,239 patients received SE. Training duration was 7.0 ± 3.3 weeks, training frequency was 3.1 ± 1.8 sessions per week with a mean training time of 44.6 ± 18.0 min per session. The meta-regressions’ mean effect size was d = 1.80 (pain) and d = 1.70 (disability). Total R2 was 0.445 and 0.17. Moderate quality evidence (R2 = 0.231) revealed that a training duration of 20 to 30 min elicited the largest effect (both in pain and disability, logarithmic association). Low quality evidence (R2 = 0.125) revealed that training 3 to 5 times per week led to the largest effect of SE in patients with chronic non-specific LBP (inverted U-shaped association). In patients with non-specific chronic LBP, stabilization exercise with a training frequency of 3 to 5 times per week (Grade C) and a training time of 20 to 30 min per session (Grade A) elicited the largest effect on pain and disability.
Delayed-onset muscle soreness (DOMS) is a common symptom in people participating in exercise, sport, or recreational physical activities. Several remedies have been proposed to prevent and alleviate DOMS. In 2008 and 2015, two studies have been conducted to investigate the effects of acupuncture on symptoms and muscle function in eccentric exercise-induced DOMS of the biceps brachii muscle. In 2008 a prospective, randomized, controlled, observer and subject-blinded trial was undertaken with 22 healthy subjects (22–30 years; 12 females) being randomly assigned to three treatment groups: real acupuncture (deep needling at classic acupuncture points and tender points; n = 7), sham-acupuncture (superficial needling at non-acupuncture points; n = 8), and control (n = 7). In 2015, a five-arm randomized controlled study was conducted with 60 subjects (22 females, 23.6 ± 2.8 years). Participants were randomly allocated to needle, laser, sham needle, sham laser acupuncture, and no intervention.
In both cases treatment was applied immediately, 24 and 48 hours after DOMS induction.
The outcome measures included pain perception (visual analogue scale; VAS), mechanical pain threshold (MPT), maximum isometric voluntary force (MIVF) and pressure pain threshold (PPT).
Results: In 2008, following nonparametric testing, there were no significant differences between groups in outcome measures at baseline. After 72 hours, pain perception (VAS) was significantly lower in the acupuncture group compared to the sham acupuncture and control subjects. However, the mean MPT and MIVF scores were not significantly different between groups. This lead to the conclusion, that acupuncture seemed to have no effects on MPT and muscle function, but reduced perceived pain arising from exercise-induced DOMS.
The more recent results from 2015 indicated that neither verum nor sham interventions significantly improved outcomes within 72 hours when compared with the no treatment control (P > 0.05).