4.5 Article

Hamstring injury prevention in soccer: Before or after training?

Journal

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/sms.12925

Keywords

adaptation; hamstring; injury prevention; scheduling; soccer

Categories

Funding

  1. New South Wales Sporting Injuries Committee

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We examined the effects of a 12-week program of Nordic hamstring exercises (NHE), administered before or after football training, upon eccentric hamstring strength, muscle activity, and architectural adaptations. Amateur soccer players were randomized into three groups. The control group (CON; n=11) undertook core stability exercises, whereas a periodized NHE program was delivered either before (NHEBEF; n=10) or after (NHEAFT; n=14) biweekly training sessions. Outcome measures included peak torque and concomitant normalized peak surface electromyography signals (sEMG) of the biceps femoris (BF) and medial hamstring (MH) muscles during knee flexor maximal eccentric contractions, performed at 30 degrees s(-1). Ultrasonography was used to determine BF muscle thickness, muscle fiber pennation angle, and fascicle length. Performing the NHE derived likely moderate peak torque increases in both NHEBEF (+11.9%; 90% confidence interval: 3.6%-20.9%) and NHEAFT (+11.6%; 2.6%-21.5%) vs CON. Maximum sEMG increases were moderately greater in the BF of both NHE training groups vs CON. There were likely moderate increases in BF muscle thickness (+0.17cm; 0.05-0.29cm) and likely small pennation angle increases (+1.03 degrees; -0.08 degrees to 2.14 degrees) in NHEAFT vs CON and NHEBEF. BF fascicle length increases were likely greater in NHEBEF (+1.58cm; 0.48-2.68cm; small effect) vs CON and NHEAFT. A 12-week eccentric hamstring strengthening program increased strength and sEMG to a similar magnitude irrespective of its scheduling relative to the football training session. However, architectural adaptations to support the strength gains differed according to the timing of the injury prevention program.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available