| Literature DB >> 35427407 |
Filipe Rosa1, Hugo Sarmento1, João Pedro Duarte1, Joel Barrera1, Francisco Loureiro1, Vasco Vaz1, Nestor Saavedra2, António José Figueiredo1.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the strength of the knee flexors and extensors and hip abductor and adductor muscles in young soccer players. Twenty-three male under-19 soccer players participated in this study (age: 17.7 ± 0.2 years; height: 173.0 ± 1.1 cm; body mass: 66.1 ± 1.3 kg). Body composition was measured using a bioelectrical impedance (InBody770), and the dynamometry was performed by an isokinetic dynamometer (Biodex System 3) for knee flexion and extension, and by an isometric dynamometer (Smart Groin Trainer), for hip adduction and abduction. Comparisons were made between dominant members (D) vs. non-dominant members (ND) and adductors vs. abductors (ADD:ABD) using the Wilcoxon test. There were statistically significant differences in the peak torques between the dominant and non-dominant members in the flexion function (Z = -4.198, p < 0.01) and in the extension function (Z = -4.197, p < 0.01) of the knee in concentric muscular action, and the flexion (Z = -4.198, p < 0.01) and in the extension (Z = -4.198, p < 0.01) of the knee in eccentric muscular action. No statistically significant differences were obtained in the conventional ratio (Z = -0.456, p = 0.648) nor the functional ratio (Z = -0.335, p = 0.738) between D and ND members. There were no statistically significant differences between adductors and abductors at the moment of strength for absolute values (N). The reference absolute and normalized to the weight values and the ADD:ABD can be used as a guideline for classifying players in screening and comparison in return tests to sports practice after an injury.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35427407 PMCID: PMC9012372 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0266881
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.752
Descriptive statistics and normality test for the total sample considering crhonovariables and anthropometry (n = 23).
| variables | units | mean | SD | Shapiro-Wilk | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| value | SE | 95% CI | value |
| |||
| Chronological age | years | 17.7 | 0.8 | (17.3 to 18.0) | 0.2 | 0.897 | 0.022 |
| Training experience | years | 11.9 | 1.7 | (11.1 to 12.5) | 0.4 | 0.846 | <0.01 |
| Stature | cm | 173.0 | 5.4 | (171.0 to 175.4) | 1.1 | 0.941 | 0.187 |
| Body mass | kg | 66.1 | 6.2 | (63.4 to 68.6) | 1.3 | 0.967 | 0.615 |
| Fat mass | kg | 9.0 | 2.2 | (8.1 to 10.0) | 0.5 | 0.889 | 0.015 |
| Fat mass | % | 13.5 | 2.6 | (12.5 to 14.6) | 0.5 | 0.920 | 0.067 |
| Left appendicular thigh volume | L | 4.7 | 0.6 | (4.4 to 4.9) | 0.1 | 0.954 | 0.350 |
| Right appendicular thigh volume | L | 4.6 | 0.6 | (4.3 to 4.9) | 0.1 | 0.982 | 0.942 |
Descriptive statistics and normality test for the total sample considering strength parameters (n = 23).
| variables | units | mean | SD | Shapiro-Wilk | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| value | SE | 95% CI | value |
| |||
| Dominant PT KEcon | N.m | 195.5 | 36.7 | (181.1 to 211.4) | 7.7 | 0.983 | 0.950 |
| Non-Dominant PT KEcon | N.m | 173.7 | 336 | (160.1 to 187.8) | 7.0 | 0.940 | 0.177 |
| Dominant PT KFcon | N.m | 112.1 | 29.2 | (98.9 to 123.5) | 6.1 | 0.933 | 0.125 |
| Non-Dominant PT KFcon | N.m | 98.3 | 30.8 | (84.3 to 110.0) | 6.4 | 0.896 | 0.021 |
| Dominant conventional ratio | 0.58 | 0.13 | (0.52 to 0.62) | 0.03 | 0.890 | 0.016 | |
| Non-Dominant conventional ratio | 0.57 | 0.15 | (0.50 to 0.62) | 0.03 | 0.893 | 0.018 | |
| Dominant PT KEecc | N.m | 239.4 | 55.8 | (218.1 to 263.1) | 11.6 | 0.977 | 0.859 |
| Non-Dominant PT KEecc | N.m | 211.6 | 51.4 | (193.1 to 233.7) | 10.7 | 0.954 | 0.355 |
| Dominant PT KFecc | N.m | 148.3 | 32.4 | (134.5 to 162.2) | 6.8 | 0.959 | 0.450 |
| Non-Dominant PT KFecc | N.m | 127.6 | 27.4 | (116.5 to 139.2) | 5.7 | 0.969 | 0.663 |
| Dominant functional ratio | 0.77 | 0.16 | (0.71 to 0.83) | 0.03 | 0.885 | 0.012 | |
| Non-Dominant functional ratio | 0.74 | 0.15 | (0.69 to 0.81) | 0.03 | 0.923 | 0.077 | |
| T Adductors | N | 468.2 | 69.9 | (435.3 to 501.9) | 18.1 | 0.934 | 0.313 |
| T Adductors | N/kg | 7.1 | 1.1 | (6.6 to 7.7) | 0.3 | 0.793 | 0.003 |
| T Abductors | N | 473.2 | 80.5 | (429.9 to 412.4) | 20.8 | 0.969 | 0.844 |
| T Abductors | N/kg | 7.1 | 1.0 | (6.7 to 7.7) | 0.3 | 0.926 | 0.239 |
PT (Peak Torque); T (Torque); KE (Knee Extensors); KF (Knee Flexors); con (concentric); ecc (eccentric); SE (Standard Error); CI (Confidence Interval); SD (Standard Deviation).
Comparative statistics for knee extensors, knee flexors and ratios considering dominant and non-dominant lower-limbs.
| variables | Dominant | Non-Dominant | Wilcoxon | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| mean | SD | mean | SD | Z | p | |
| PT KEcon | 195.5 | 7.7 | 173.7 | 7.0 | –4.197 | <0.01 |
| PT KFcon | 112.1 | 6.1 | 98.3 | 6.4 | –4.198 | <0.01 |
| Conventional ratio | 0.58 | 0.03 | 0.57 | 0.03 | –0.456 | 0.648 |
| PT KEecc | 239.4 | 11.6 | 211.6 | 10.7 | –4.198 | <0.01 |
| PT KFecc | 200.6 | 6.8 | 172.3 | 5.7 | –4.198 | <0.01 |
| Functional ratio | 0.77 | 0.03 | 0.74 | 0.03 | –0.335 | 0.738 |
PT (Peak Torque); KE (Knee Extensors); KF (Knee Flexors); con (concentric); ecc (eccentric); SD (Standard Deviation).
Fig 1Dominant vs. non-dominant bilateral differences (%) for the knee joint.
KE (Knee Extensors); KF (Knee Flexors); con (concentric); ecc (eccentric).