Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35657492›Full record

SynthesisSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2022

Mechanical, Material and Morphological Adaptations of Healthy Lower Limb Tendons to Mechanical Loading: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Stephanie L Lazarczuk, Nirav Maniar, David A Opar, Steven J Duhig, Anthony Shield, Rod S Barrett, Matthew N Bourne

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
10.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

50 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 72 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Stephanie L LazarczukSchool of Health Sciences and Social Work, Griffith University, Gold Coast, QLD, Australia. stephanie.lazarczuk@griffithuni.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0001-8467-8799
Nirav ManiarSchool of Behavioural and Health Sciences, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6180-6003
David A OparSchool of Behavioural and Health Sciences, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8354-6353
Steven J DuhigSchool of Health Sciences and Social Work, Griffith University, Gold Coast, QLD, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-4014-7731
Anthony ShieldSchool of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences and Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0393-2466
Rod S BarrettSchool of Health Sciences and Social Work, Griffith University, Gold Coast, QLD, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1784-1629
Matthew N BourneSchool of Health Sciences and Social Work, Griffith University, Gold Coast, QLD, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3374-4669
Griffith University · AUAustralian Catholic University · AUQueensland University of Technology · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundExposure to increased mechanical loading during physical training can lead to increased tendon stiffness. However, the loading regimen that maximises tendon adaptation and the extent to which adaptation is driven by changes in tendon material properties or tendon geometry is not fully understood.

objectiveTo determine (1) the effect of mechanical loading on tendon stiffness, modulus and cross-sectional area (CSA); (2) whether adaptations in stiffness are driven primarily by changes in CSA or modulus; (3) the effect of training type and associated loading parameters (relative intensity; localised strain, load duration, load volume and contraction mode) on stiffness, modulus or CSA; and (4) whether the magnitude of adaptation in tendon properties differs between age groups.

methodsFive databases (PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, EMBASE) were searched for studies detailing load-induced adaptations in tendon morphological, material or mechanical properties. Standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated and data were pooled using a random effects model to estimate variance. Meta regression was used to examine the moderating effects of changes in tendon CSA and modulus on tendon stiffness.

resultsSixty-one articles met the inclusion criteria. The total number of participants in the included studies was 763. The Achilles tendon (33 studies) and the patella tendon (24 studies) were the most commonly studied regions. Resistance training was the main type of intervention (49 studies). Mechanical loading produced moderate increases in stiffness (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.74; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62-0.86), large increases in modulus (SMD 0.82; 95% CI 0.58-1.07), and small increases in CSA (SMD 0.22; 95% CI 0.12-0.33). Meta-regression revealed that the main moderator of increased stiffness was modulus. Resistance training interventions induced greater increases in modulus than other training types (SMD 0.90; 95% CI 0.65-1.15) and higher strain resistance training protocols induced greater increases in modulus (SMD 0.82; 95% CI 0.44-1.20; p = 0.009) and stiffness (SMD 1.04; 95% CI 0.65-1.43; p = 0.007) than low-strain protocols. The magnitude of stiffness and modulus differences were greater in adult participants.

conclusionsMechanical loading leads to positive adaptation in lower limb tendon stiffness, modulus and CSA. Studies to date indicate that the main mechanism of increased tendon stiffness due to physical training is increased tendon modulus, and that resistance training performed at high compared to low localised tendon strains is associated with the greatest positive tendon adaptation. PROSPERO registration no.: CRD42019141299.

Indexed as

Achilles TendonResistance TrainingAdaptation, PhysiologicalAdultElastic ModulusHumansLower Extremity

Identifiers

PMID35657492
PMCPMC9474511
OpenAlexW4281651749

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.