Lasse Ishøi1, Kristian Thorborg1, Per Hölmich1, Kasper Krommes1. 1. Sports Orthopedic Research Center - Copenhagen (SORC-C), Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Copenhagen University Hospital, Amager-Hvidovre, Denmark.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hamstring strain injuries are common in many sports. Following a hamstring injury, deficits in peak and explosive strength may persist after return to sport potentially affecting sprint performance. Assessment of repeated-sprint ability is recognized as an important part of the return to sport evaluation after a hamstring injury.Purpose: This purpose of this exploratory cross-sectional study was to compare sprinting performance obtained during a repeated-sprint test between football players with and without a previous hamstring strain injury. METHODS: Forty-four fully active sub-elite football players, 11 with a previous hamstring strain injury during the preceding 12 months (cases; mean age, SD: 25.6 ± 4.4) and 33 demographically similar controls (mean age, SD: 23.2 ± 3.7), were included from six clubs. All players underwent a repeated-sprint test, consisting of six 30-meter maximal sprints with 90 seconds of recovery between sprints. Sprint performance was captured using high-speed video-recording and subsequently assessed by a blinded tester to calculate maximal sprint velocity, maximal horizontal force, maximal horizontal power, and mechanical effectiveness. RESULTS: A significant between-group difference was seen in favor of players having a previous hamstring injury over 6 sprints for maximal velocity (mean difference: 0.457 m/s, 95% CI: 0.059-0.849, p = 0.025) and mechanical effectiveness (mean difference: 0.009, 95% CI: 0.001-0.016, p = 0.020). CONCLUSION: Repeated-sprint performance was not impaired in football players with a previous hamstring strain injury; in fact, higher mean maximal sprinting velocity and better mechanical effectiveness were found in players with compared to without a previous hamstring injury. The higher sprinting velocity, which likely increases biomechanical load on the hamstring muscles, in previously injured players may increase the risk of recurrent injuries. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3b.
BACKGROUND: Hamstring strain injuries are common in many sports. Following a hamstring injury, deficits in peak and explosive strength may persist after return to sport potentially affecting sprint performance. Assessment of repeated-sprint ability is recognized as an important part of the return to sport evaluation after a hamstring injury.Purpose: This purpose of this exploratory cross-sectional study was to compare sprinting performance obtained during a repeated-sprint test between football players with and without a previous hamstring strain injury. METHODS: Forty-four fully active sub-elite football players, 11 with a previous hamstring strain injury during the preceding 12 months (cases; mean age, SD: 25.6 ± 4.4) and 33 demographically similar controls (mean age, SD: 23.2 ± 3.7), were included from six clubs. All players underwent a repeated-sprint test, consisting of six 30-meter maximal sprints with 90 seconds of recovery between sprints. Sprint performance was captured using high-speed video-recording and subsequently assessed by a blinded tester to calculate maximal sprint velocity, maximal horizontal force, maximal horizontal power, and mechanical effectiveness. RESULTS: A significant between-group difference was seen in favor of players having a previous hamstring injury over 6 sprints for maximal velocity (mean difference: 0.457 m/s, 95% CI: 0.059-0.849, p = 0.025) and mechanical effectiveness (mean difference: 0.009, 95% CI: 0.001-0.016, p = 0.020). CONCLUSION: Repeated-sprint performance was not impaired in football players with a previous hamstring strain injury; in fact, higher mean maximal sprinting velocity and better mechanical effectiveness were found in players with compared to without a previous hamstring injury. The higher sprinting velocity, which likely increases biomechanical load on the hamstring muscles, in previously injured players may increase the risk of recurrent injuries. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3b.
Authors: Jan P Vandenbroucke; Erik von Elm; Douglas G Altman; Peter C Gøtzsche; Cynthia D Mulrow; Stuart J Pocock; Charles Poole; James J Schlesselman; Matthias Egger Journal: Epidemiology Date: 2007-11 Impact factor: 4.822
Authors: P Samozino; G Rabita; S Dorel; J Slawinski; N Peyrot; E Saez de Villarreal; J-B Morin Journal: Scand J Med Sci Sports Date: 2015-05-21 Impact factor: 4.221
Authors: J Mendiguchia; P Samozino; E Martinez-Ruiz; M Brughelli; S Schmikli; J-B Morin; A Mendez-Villanueva Journal: Int J Sports Med Date: 2014-01-14 Impact factor: 3.118
Authors: Arnlaug Wangensteen; Johannes L Tol; Erik Witvrouw; Robbart Van Linschoten; Emad Almusa; Bruce Hamilton; Roald Bahr Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2016-05-16 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Nirav Maniar; Anthony J Shield; Morgan D Williams; Ryan G Timmins; David A Opar Journal: Br J Sports Med Date: 2016-04-13 Impact factor: 13.800