Biomechanical Lesions, Injury;Sports, Musculoskeletal Injury
Conditions
Keywords
Basketball, Physical Therapy, Youth athletes
Brief summary
Basketball is an impact, coordination-opposition sport with continuous contact among players and it is considered a sport of medium-high injury incidence. Players are force to have a physical condition appropriate to their practice and the demand to which they must respond due to the intensity of the efforts this sport requires. In order to achieve this, it is necessary to establish an evaluation protocol that allows the detection of functional deficiencies, to guide and conduct in a specific and early way every moment of players' health and growth. The purpose of this study is to evaluate and detect federated youth basketball players' (U12 - U17) neuromuscular deficiencies in mobility, stability and landing technique in static and dynamic situations to simulate all the most important actions of basketball demands.
Detailed description
It is intended that the specific detection and individualized approach to neuromuscular deficiencies will decrease the prevalence of injuries and accidents and therefore, the performance of training basketball players will be improved. The purpose of this study was to evaluate and detect federated youth basketball players' (under 12 years until under 17 years) neuromuscular deficits in mobility, stability and landing technique in static and dynamic situations similar to simulate the most important actions of basketball demands. This cross-sectional study was conducted from October 2018 to May 2019. A total of 778 basketball players were selected for the present study. In order to evaluate this specific tests and trials will be carried out on different teams from various clubs in the categories from under 12 years (U12) to under 17 (U17), both male and female. The evaluations will consist of a static physical measures and a dynamic one. These will be conducted throughout the season. Inclusion criteria were: age \> 12 years and \<18 years at testing, and to be actively competing during the study. Subjects were excluded if they had suffered any injury in lower limbs before the screening; presented any injury (overuse or acute) at the time of testing or if they suffered any oncological, psychological and/or psychiatric illnesses, or if they did not attend on the day of the assessment. The main outcomes were ankle joint dorsiflexion was analyzed with Weight-bearing Dorsiflexion Test; monopodial ankle stability was analyzed with Single Leg Balance Test. Dynamic lower extremity valgus was analyzed with Single Leg Squat Test, Modified Tuck Jump Test, Single Leg Squat Test and Hurdle Step Test were used to evaluate also Lumbopelvic stability and dynamic postural control. Neuromuscular deficits during continuous tuck jumps, landing technique flaws and Plyometric Technique were analyzed with Modified Tuck Jump Test. All these tests are scientifically validated for this purpose. All players were familiar with the procedures of all test before. Testing was performed in the same day, in the same order, at the same time of the day (18:00-20:00).
Interventions
OTHERBasketball Injury Defense
To establish a specific evaluation protocol for youth basketball players.
Sponsors
University Rovira i Virgili
Study design
Observational model
OTHER
Time perspective
CROSS_SECTIONAL
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
12 Years to 17 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* Age ≥ 12 years and \<18 years at testing. * To be actively competing during the study.
Exclusion criteria
* Had suffered any injury in lower limbs before the screening. * Presented any injury (overuse or acute) at the time of testing. * Psychological or psychiatric diseases diagnosed. * Oncological diseases diagnosed. * Did not attend on the day of the assessment.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Ankle joint dorsiflexion | Through study completion, an average of 1 year | Weight-bearing dorsiflexion test. Ankle dorsiflexion was evaluated through the LegMotion system (LegMotion, your Motion®, Albacete, Spain). Each player started with their hands on their hips, and put the assigned foot on the middle of the longitudinal line just behind the transversal line on the platform. The alternate foot was positioned off the platform with toes at the edge of the platform. Each trial consisted of flexing the ankle as much as possible without raising the heel of the assessed ankle trying to touch a marker, situated just behind the patella, with their knee. The distance achieved was recorded in centimeters. Three trials were allowed with each ankle (i.e., left and right) with 10 seconds of passive recovery between trials. The third value in each ankle was used in subsequent analysis of weight-bearing dorsiflexion. |
| Ankle stability | Through study completion, an average of 1 year | Single Leg Balance Test. It was considered stable if the foot remained in neutral position during movement. However, if excessive pronation of the foot was evident during movement or external rotation of the leg/foot it was scored as unstable. |
| Dynamic lower extremity valgus | Through study completion, an average of 1 year | Single Leg Squat Test. An aligned knee-ankle position was considered when the patella was aligned with the second toe. Five consecutive attempts were performed with each limb, and the correct alignment between the knee and the second toe in loading was assessed to analyze an excess of knee valgus. |
| Lumbopelvic stability | Through study completion, an average of 1 year | Single Leg Squat Test. It was considered stable if there was minimal movement in all three planes and the sacroiliac joints were aligned. On the other hand, it was considered unstable if the sacroiliac joints were not aligned in the frontal plane or if there was evidence of anteroposterior tilt or rotation in the sagittal plane as well as anterior trunk flexion or increased lumbar lordosis. |
| Dynamic postural control | Through study completion, an average of 1 year | Hurdle Step Test. For this purpose, the deviation of the trunk with respect to the center of gravity was observed. A smaller displacement or deviation implied a better postural stability. |
| Neuromuscular deficits during continuous tuck jumps | Through study completion, an average of 1 year | Modified Tuck Jump Test. Lower extremity valgus at landing, Thighs do not reach parallel (peak of jump), Thighs not equal side-to-side during flight |
| Landing technique flaws | Through study completion, an average of 1 year | Modified Tuck Jump Test. Foot placement not shoulder width apart, Foot placement not parallel (front to back), Foot contact timing not equal (Asymmetrical landing), Excessive landing contact noise. |
| Plyometric Technique | Through study completion, an average of 1 year | Modified Tuck Jump Test. Pause between jumps, Technique declines prior 10 seconds, Does not land in same foot print (Consistent point of landing) |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Lower limb dominance | Through study completion, an average of 1 year | Dominant leg / non dominant leg |
| Wingspan | Through study completion, an average of 1 year | Centimeters |
| Age | Through study completion, an average of 1 year | Years |
| Age categories | Through study completion, an average of 1 year | Under 12, Under 14, Under 16 or Under 17 |
| Body Mass Index (BMI) | Through study completion, an average of 1 year | kg/m2 |
| Generalized hipermobility | Through study completion, an average of 1 year | The presence of hypermobile confirmed by Beighton's criteria. Considering hypermobile as those who obtained a score of \> 7 points out of a total of 9 points |
| Gender | Through study completion, an average of 1 year | Female or male |
| Weight | Through study completion, an average of 1 year | Kilograms |
| Height | Through study completion, an average of 1 year | Centimeters |
Countries
Spain
Outcome results
None listed