Nordin Andrew D, Dufek Janet S, James C Roger, Bates Barry T
a School of Kinesiology , University of Michigan , Ann Arbor , MI , USA.
b Kinesiology and Nutrition Sciences , University of Nevada, Las Vegas , Las Vegas , NV , USA.
J Sports Sci. 2017 Sep;35(18):1-6. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2016.1240876. Epub 2016 Oct 11.
Our purpose was to use group and single-case methods to examine inter-individual variability in the context of factors related to landing injuries. We tested the load accommodation strategies model (An exploration of load accommodation strategies during walking with extremity-carried weights. Human Movement Science, 35, 17-29) using landing impulse, revealing pre-landing strategies following height and external load manipulations. Ten healthy volunteers (8 male, 2 female, 24.0 ± 1.4 years, 1.72 ± 0.06 m, 73.5 ± 8.7 kg) were analysed across 12 trials in each of three load conditions (100% body weight [BW], 110% BW, 120% BW) from two landing heights (30 cm, 60 cm). Landing impulse (BW ∙ s) was computed for each participant-condition-trial, using impulse ratios (unit-less; BW ∙ s/BW ∙ s) to evaluate load accommodation strategies between adjacent load conditions (110%/100%, 120%/110%) at each landing height. Load accommodation strategy classifications were based on 95% confidence intervals (CIs) containing mechanically predicted impulse ratios (1.10 and 1.09 for 110/100% BW and 120/110% BW, respectively; α = 0.05). Mean group impulse ratios matched and exceeded predicted impulse ratios. Single-case analyses revealed a range of individual landing strategies that might be overlooked during group analyses, possibly uncovering individuals at greater risk of injury during landing activities.
我们的目的是使用分组和单病例方法，在与落地损伤相关的因素背景下检查个体间的变异性。我们使用落地冲量测试了负荷适应策略模型（《携带肢体负重行走时负荷适应策略的探索》。《人类运动科学》，35卷，第17 - 29页），揭示了高度和外部负荷操纵后的着陆前策略。对10名健康志愿者（8名男性，2名女性，年龄24.0 ± 1.4岁，身高1.72 ± 0.06米，体重73.5 ± 8.7千克）在三种负荷条件（100%体重[BW]、110% BW、120% BW）下，从两个着陆高度（30厘米、60厘米）进行的12次试验进行了分析。计算每个参与者 - 条件 - 试验的落地冲量（BW ∙ s），使用冲量比（无单位；BW ∙ s/BW ∙ s）来评估每个着陆高度相邻负荷条件（110%/100%、120%/110%）之间的负荷适应策略。负荷适应策略分类基于包含机械预测冲量比的95%置信区间（CIs）（110/100% BW和120/110% BW分别为1.10和1.09；α = 0.05）。平均分组冲量比与预测冲量比匹配且超过了预测冲量比。单病例分析揭示了一系列个体着陆策略，这些策略在分组分析中可能被忽视，可能发现着陆活动中受伤风险更高的个体。
