4.5 Article

Differences in lower extremity kinematics between a bilateral drop-vertical jump and a single-leg step-down

期刊

出版社

J O S P T
DOI: 10.2519/jospt.2007.2202

关键词

ACL; biomechanics; gender; hip; knee

向作者/读者索取更多资源

STUDY DESIGN: Mixed-model, repeated-measures design in a laboratory setting. OBJECTIVES: To examine the differences in hip, knee, and ankle kinematics between a bilateral drop-vertical jump and single-leg step-down. A secondary purpose was to examine gender differences in kinematics of the tasks. BACKGROUND: Both a drop-vertical jump and step-down task have been used to evaluate lower extremity movement and injury risk. The differences in joint angles between these tasks have not been reported. METHODS AND MEASURES: Three-dimensional joint angles of the hip, knee, and ankle of 19 females and 18 males were evaluated with a high-speed camera system while the subjects performed a bilateral drop-vertical jump and a single-leg step-down. Maximum joint angles were compared between tasks and genders using ANOVA models. RESULTS: When averaged across both genders, the step-down produced greater rearfoot eversion (12 degrees compared to 8 degrees) (P <.0005) and hip addluction (16 degrees compared to 1 degrees) (P =.03) than the drop-vertical jump. Females had greater hip internal rotation in the step-down than in the drop-vertical jump (5 degrees compared to 2 degrees) (P =.02). When averaged across both tasks, females had greater knee abduction than males in both tasks (4 degrees compared to 0 degrees) (P <.0005). CONCLUSIONS: The unilateral step-down task produced greater motion in the frontal and transverse planes at the ankle and hip, and would be appropriate in evaluating control of the hip. The bilateral drop-vertical jump produced greater knee abduction in both genders and may be appropriate for evaluating excessive knee abduction as a risk factor for noncontact anterior cruciate ligament injury, for example. The 2 tasks appear to challenge the neuromuscular system in different manners, and both should continue to be used in the investigation of injury risk.

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

4.5
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