Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29340745›Full record

Trial reportKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2018

A 6-week warm-up injury prevention programme results in minimal biomechanical changes during jump landings: a randomized controlled trial.

Jeffrey B Taylor, Kevin R Ford, Randy J Schmitz, Scott E Ross, Terry A Ackerman, Sandra J Shultz

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Hip biomechanics differ in responders and non-responders to an ACL injury prevention program.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2020
    Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Jeffrey B TaylorDepartment of Physical Therapy, High Point University, One University Parkway, High Point, NC, 27268, USA. jtaylor@highpoint.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6608-0192
Kevin R FordDepartment of Physical Therapy, High Point University, One University Parkway, High Point, NC, 27268, USA.
Randy J SchmitzDepartment of Kinesiology, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Greensboro, NC, USA.
Scott E RossDepartment of Kinesiology, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Greensboro, NC, USA.
Terry A AckermanAmerican College Testing, Iowa City, IA, USA.
Sandra J ShultzDepartment of Kinesiology, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Greensboro, NC, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo examine the extent to which an ACL injury prevention programme modifies lower extremity biomechanics during single- and double-leg landing tasks in both the sagittal and frontal plane. It was hypothesized that the training programme would elicit improvements in lower extremity biomechanics, but that these improvements would be greater during a double-leg sagittal plane landing task than tasks performed on a single leg or in the frontal plane.

methodsNinety-seven competitive multi-directional sport athletes that competed at the middle- or high-school level were cluster randomized into intervention (n = 48, age = 15.4 ± 1.0 years, height = 1.7 ± 0.07 m, mass = 59.9 ± 11.0 kg) and control (n = 49, age = 15.7 ± 1.6 years, height = 1.7 ± 0.06 m, mass = 60.4 ± 7.7 kg) groups. The intervention group participated in an established 6-week warm-up-based ACL injury prevention programme. Three-dimensional biomechanical analyses of a double- (SAG-DL) and single-leg (SAG-SL) sagittal, and double- (FRONT-DL) and single-leg (FRONT-SL) frontal plane jump landing tasks were tested before and after the intervention. Peak angles, excursions, and external joint moments were analysed for group differences using 2 (group) × 4 (task) repeated measures MANOVA models of delta scores (post-pre-test value) (α < 0.05).

resultsRelative to the control group, no significant biomechanical changes were identified in the intervention group for any of the tasks (n.s.). However, a group by task interaction was identified for knee abduction (λ = 0.80, p = 0.02), such that participants in the intervention group showed relative decreases in knee abduction moments during the SAG-DL compared to the SAG-SL (p = 0.005; d = 0.45, CI = 0.04-0.85) task.

conclusionA 6-week warm-up-based ACL injury prevention programme resulted in no significant biomechanical changes during a variety of multi-directional jump landings. Clinically, future prevention programmes should provide a greater training stimulus (intensity, volume), more specificity to tasks associated with the mechanism of ACL injury (single-leg, non-sagittal plane jump landings), and longer programme duration (> 6 weeks) to elicit meaningful biomechanical changes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.

Indexed as

Warm-Up ExerciseAdolescentAnterior Cruciate Ligament InjuriesAthletic InjuriesBiomechanical PhenomenaExercise TestFemaleHumansKneeLower ExtremityMaleMovementRange of Motion, ArticularRotationACLInjury preventionLower extremity biomechanicsMulti-directional sports

Identifiers

PMID29340745

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.