4.6 Article

Long-Term Patterns of Bone Mineral Density in an Elite Soccer Player

期刊

FRONTIERS IN PHYSIOLOGY
卷 12, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fphys.2021.631543

关键词

DXA; bone; competitive season; football; least significant change

资金

  1. University of Verona

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Changes in bone mineral density associated with soccer participation were studied in a longitudinal investigation of an elite player over 10 years. Findings suggest that aBMD tends to increase with age, the preferred leg has higher aBMD, seasonal changes are meaningful, and the off-season has no effect on aBMD. Further research is needed to clarify long-term and seasonal patterns of bone characteristics in soccer players.
Changes in bone mineral density (BMD) have been associated with association football (soccer) participation. Seasonal changes in BMD of soccer players have been proposed as well. However, previous investigations were based on short-term observations. Actually, longitudinal investigation of BMD in soccer players is lacking, possibly because of frequent inter-club transfer, changes in club policy or continued availability of the relevant facilities. Dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA)-measured areal BMD (aBMD) was obtained during the competitive season in an elite soccer player along 10 consecutive years. Findings showed that (1) aBMD tends to increase with age, independently of body mass; (2) The right (preferred, kicking) leg has higher aBMD than the left (non-preferred, support) one; (3) Meaningful (i.e., >least significant change, LSC) changes in aBMD take place along the season; and (4) The off-season (transition) period has no effect on aBMD. Findings prompt for future research aimed at clarifying the long-term and seasonal patterns of bone characteristics in soccer in relation with age and type/dose of training. Season-around, long-term scrutiny of bone status in soccer players would help controlling for possible changes/asymmetries in bone mineralization/strength.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据