ArticlePloS one2022
An experimental model of contusion injury in humans.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Beyond the Hit: Muscle and Vascular Tissue Responses to Contact Exposure in Collision Sports-A Narrative Review.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Review
- Mechanism of static loading injury in human skeletal muscle cells.American journal of translational research · 2024Article
- Dismissing the idea that basketball is a "contactless" sport: quantifying contacts during professional gameplay.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2024Article
- A comparison of the effects of sheep's milk and cow's milk on recovery from eccentric exercise.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionContusion injuries are common in sport, but our knowledge of the responses to injury primarily come from animal studies and research using eccentric exercise. Therefore, the aim of this study was to develop a model of contusion injury in human participants and, additionally, investigate and compare physiological responses to four impact loads.
methodsThirty-two males were exposed to a single impact of either 4.2, 5.2, 6.2 or 7.2kg, dropped from 67 cm, on to the vastus lateralis of one leg. Maximum voluntary and electrically induced quadriceps force, and pressure pain threshold were measured, and blood sampling carried out, prior to and 30min, 24, 48 and 72h post-impact. Magnetic resonance imaging was carried out 24h post-impact to quantify oedema.
resultsDespite impact force with 7.2kg (1681.4 ± 235.6 N) not being different to 6.2kg (1690.7 ± 117.6 N), 7.2kg resulted in greater volume of oedema, voluntary force loss, pain and elevations in creatine kinase than the other loads. Although electrically induced force changed over time, post-hoc analysis failed to identify any changes. Interleukin-6 and prostaglandin-E2 did not change over time for any of the loads. Significant correlations were found between oedema volume, pressure pain threshold and maximum voluntary contraction force.
conclusionsThis is the first experimental study to investigate traumatic loading of skeletal muscle and the subsequent physiological responses associated with contusion injuries in humans. The absence of immediate elevations in creatine kinase and changes in electrically induced force suggest impact, with forces similar to those experienced in contact sport, does not cause significant, direct damage to skeletal muscle. However, the relationship between oedema volume, changes in pressure pain threshold and maximum voluntary contraction force suggests central inhibition plays a role in contusion-related muscle dysfunction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.