Suppr超能文献

功能性动作筛查评分对过顶深蹲时下肢运动学的比较。

Comparison of Lower Extremity Kinematics during the Overhead Deep Squat by Functional Movement Screen Score.

机构信息

Northern Arizona University, Phoenix Biomedical Campus, Department of Athletic Training; Phoenix, AZ, USA.

California State University, Fullerton, Department of Kinesiology, Fullerton CA, USA.

出版信息

J Sports Sci Med. 2021 Oct 1;20(4):759-765. doi: 10.52082/jssm.2021.759. eCollection 2021 Dec.

Abstract

It is unclear if the Functional Movement Screen (FMS) scoring criteria identify kinematics that have been associated with lower extremity injury risk. The purpose was to compare lower extremity kinematics of the overhead deep squat (OHDS) during the FMS between individuals who were grouped on FMS scoring. Forty-five adults who were free of injury and without knowledge of the FMS or its scoring criteria (males = 19, females = 26 height = 1.68 0.08 m; mass = 70.7 7 13.0 kg). Three-dimensional lower extremity kinematics during an OHDS were measured using a motion capture system. One-way MANOVA was used to compare kinematic outcomes (peak hip flexion angle, hip adduction angle, knee flexion angle, knee abduction angle, knee internal rotation angle, and ankle dorsiflexion angle) between FMS groups. Those who scored a 3 had greater peak hip flexion angle (F = 8.75; = 0.001), knee flexion angle (F = 13.53; = 0.001), knee internal rotation angle (F = 12.91; = 0.001), and dorsiflexion angle (F = 9.00; = 0.001) compared to those who scored a 2 or a 1. However, no differences were found in any outcome between those who scored a 2 and those who scored a 1, or in frontal plane hip or knee kinematics. FMS scoring for the OHDS identified differences in squat depth, which was characterized by larger peak hip, knee, and dorsi- flexion angles in those who scored a 3 compared with those who scored 2 or 1. However, no differences were found between those who scored a 2 or 1, and caution is recommended when interpreting these scores. Despite a different FMS score, few differences were observed in frontal or transverse plane hip and knee kinematics, and other tasks may be needed to assess frontal plane kinematics.

摘要

目前尚不清楚功能运动筛查(FMS)评分标准是否能识别与下肢损伤风险相关的运动学指标。本研究旨在比较 FMS 评分分组人群在 overhead deep squat(OHDS)中的下肢运动学。45 名无损伤且不了解 FMS 或其评分标准的成年人(男性=19,女性=26;身高=1.68 0.08 m;体重=70.7 7 13.0 kg)。使用运动捕捉系统测量 OHDS 期间的三维下肢运动学。使用单向 MANOVA 比较 FMS 组之间的运动学结果(峰值髋关节屈曲角度、髋关节内收角度、膝关节屈曲角度、膝关节外展角度、膝关节内旋角度和踝关节背屈角度)。那些得分为 3 的人具有更大的峰值髋关节屈曲角度(F = 8.75; = 0.001)、膝关节屈曲角度(F = 13.53; = 0.001)、膝关节内旋角度(F = 12.91; = 0.001)和背屈角度(F = 9.00; = 0.001),而那些得分为 2 或 1 的人。然而,在任何结果之间都没有发现得分 2 和得分 1 的人之间的差异,也没有发现在额状面髋关节或膝关节运动学方面的差异。OHDS 的 FMS 评分确定了深蹲深度的差异,3 分组的峰值髋关节、膝关节和背屈角度较大,与 2 分或 1 分组相比。然而,在得分 2 或 1 的人之间没有发现差异,因此在解释这些分数时需要谨慎。尽管 FMS 评分不同,但在额状面或横断面上髋关节和膝关节的运动学差异较小,可能需要其他任务来评估额状面运动学。

相似文献

4
Sex Differences During an Overhead Squat Assessment.过头深蹲评估中的性别差异。
J Appl Biomech. 2015 Aug;31(4):244-9. doi: 10.1123/jab.2014-0272. Epub 2015 Apr 2.
10
Peak Lower Extremity Landing Kinematics in Dancers and Nondancers.舞者与非舞者下肢落地运动学峰值比较。
J Athl Train. 2018 Apr;53(4):379-385. doi: 10.4085/1062-6050-465-16. Epub 2018 Mar 12.

本文引用的文献

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验