Biomechanical Lesions, Injury;Sports, Musculoskeletal Injury, Sports Physical Therapy
Conditions
Keywords
Basketball, Prevention
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 design, apply and analyze the effectiveness of a specific and individualized therapeutic exercise program (Basketball Pre-injury Attack) based on the approach of the functional deficiencies detected by the Basketball Injury Defense, to reduce the susceptibility to injury of youth basketball players (U14 - U17).
Detailed description
The aim of this study is to design, apply and analyze the effectiveness of a specific and individualized therapeutic exercise program (Basketball Pre-injury Attack) based on the approach of functional deficiencies detected by the Basketball Injury Defense, to reduce the susceptibility to injury of training federated basketball players. The specific objectives are: To improve the deficiencies detected in mobility, stability, symmetry and jumping/landing technique of basketball players in training categories (U14, U16 and U17). To structure and determine the contents of a specific and individualized therapeutic exercise program (Basketball Preinjury Attack) designed to improve the functional deficiencies of mobility, stability, symmetry and jumping/landing technique of training basketball players based on current scientific evidence. To analyze whether adherence to the program is achieved by raising players' awareness of the importance and benefits of performing the exercises with correct technique. To assess whether a decrease in the susceptibility to injury of training federated basketball players is achieved. For this purpose, an experimental study was conducted as a single-blind, randomized, cluster-controlled clinical trial during the months of June 2019 to February 2020 (9 months). For the development of the methodology of this study, the guidelines of the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) Statement were followed.
Interventions
OTHERBasketball Pre-injury Attack program
The intervention had a total duration of 24 weeks, with 3 sessions per week (before starting training) with a total duration of 12 to 15 minutes per session. Each session consisted of 8 exercises with a load of 2 to 3 series between 6 and 12 repetitions; and with a rest at the end of each series of \<60 seconds.
Sponsors
University Rovira i Virgili
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Investigator)
Masking description
The study was blinded to the investigators who performed both recruitment and assessments. In this way, detection bias could be controlled. It was not possible to perform a double-blind study, since it was a physical intervention and the player knew that he/she was undergoing an intervention program.
Intervention model description
Randomized controlled trial
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
14 Years to 17 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* Be between 10 and 17 years old * Be an active player at the time of selection * Sign the informed consent.
Exclusion criteria
* Being diagnosed with a psychological and/or psychiatric illness. * Being diagnosed with an oncological disease. * Be injured at the time of selection.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Symmetry between the dominant and non-dominant limb | 1 year | From the distance obtained in the Single Hop for distance Test, the Symmetry Index was calculated using the formula: (Distance dominant limb/Distance non-dominant limb)\*100. |
| Ankle dorsiflexion under load | 1 year | The Weight-bearing Lunge Test measured with the Leg Motion® system (Check Your Motion, Albacete) was used. Ankle dorsiflexion was recorded in centimeters. |
| Active hip, knee and ankle dorsiflexion | 1 year | The Hurdle Step Test measured with the Leg Motion® system (Check Your Motion, Albacete) was used. A frontal and sagittal view was recorded with two filming devices so that the results could be analyzed later. Impairment was considered in those cases in which the subject was not able to step the foot over the rope during the hurdle step or if he/she performed adduction, internal or external rotation of the hip, and lost alignment between the hip, knee and ankle. |
| Ankle stability in monopodal loading | 1 year | The Single Leg Squat Test was used and the criteria established by Perrot were used: it was considered stable if the foot remained in neutral position during the movement; and unstable if excessive pronation of the foot was evident during the movement or external rotation of the leg. To analyze the results, a frontal and sagittal view was recorded with two filming devices. |
| Monopodal dynamic knee valgus | 1 year | The Single Leg Squat Test was used. The evaluator recorded a frontal and sagittal view with two filming devices. The knee was considered to be aligned if the patella was over the second toe. |
| Lumbo-pelvic stability | 1 year | It was evaluated qualitatively with the Single Leg Squat Test and the Hurdle Step Test. To analyze the results, a frontal and sagittal view was recorded with two filming devices and the criteria established by Perrot were used. It was considered stable if there was minimal movement in all three planes, the pelvic girdle was aligned and there was no evidence of excessive anteroposterior tilt and/or trunk rotation. It was considered unstable if these criteria were not met. |
| Dynamic postural stability | 1 year | It was analyzed qualitatively with the Single Leg Squat Test. The test was recorded with two filming devices (frontal and sagittal) and the criteria established by Perrot and Crossley were used. For this purpose, the deviation of the trunk with respect to the center of gravity was observed. It was considered stable if there was minimal translation of the center of mass, i.e., no lateral flexion/tilt, rotation or trunk flexion/extension. |
| Jumping/landing technique | 1 year | It was analyzed with de Single Hop for distance Test. Ankle stability at landing, dynamic knee valgus, lumbopelvic stability and dynamic postural stability were analyzed. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Wingspan | 1 year | The horizontal wingspan was recorded in cm. |
| Category | 1 year | According to the age of the participant could compete in 3 categories: U14, U16 or U17. |
| Gender | 1 year | Female or male. |
| Weight | 1 year | Weight was recorded in kg. |
| Height | 1 year | Height was recorded in cm. |
| Age | 1 year | Recorded in years. |
| Body Mass Index (BMI) | 1 year | It was calculated from the following formula \[weight (kg) / height2 (m)\]. |
Countries
Spain
Outcome results
None listed