Dataset Information

Biomechanical risk factors of lower back pain in cricket fast bowlers using inertial measurement units: a prospective and retrospective investigation.

ABSTRACT: Objectives:To investigate spinal kinematics, tibial and sacral impacts during fast bowling, among bowlers with a history of low back pain (LBP) (retrospective) and bowlers who developed LBP in the follow-up season (prospective). Methods:35 elite male fast bowlers; senior (n=14; age=24.1±4.3 years; height=1.89±0.05?m; weight=89.2±4.6?kg) and junior (n=21; age=16.9±0.7; height=1.81±0.05; weight=73.0±9.2?kg) were recruited from professional county cricket clubs. LBP history was gathered by questionnaire and development of LBP was monitored for the follow-up season. Spinal kinematics, tibial and sacral impacts were captured using inertial measurement units placed over S1, L1, T1 and anteromedial tibia. Bonferroni corrected pairwise comparisons and effect sizes were calculated to investigate differences in retrospective and prospective LBP groups. Results:Approximately 38% of juniors (n=8) and 57% of seniors (n=8) reported a history of LBP. No differences were evident in spinal kinematics or impacts between those with LBP history and those without for seniors and juniors. Large effect sizes suggest greater rotation during wind-up (d=1.3) and faster time-to-peak tibial impacts (d=1.5) in those with no history of LBP. One junior (5%) and four (29%) seniors developed LBP. No differences were evident in spinal kinematics or impacts between those who developed LBP and those who did not for seniors. In seniors, those who developed LBP had lower tibial impacts (d=1.3) and greater lumbar extension (d=1.9) during delivery. Conclusion:Retrospective analysis displayed non-significant differences in kinematics and impacts. It is unclear if these are adaptive or impairments. Prospective analysis demonstrated large effect sizes for lumbar extension during bowling suggesting a target for future coaching interventions.

SUBMITTER: Senington B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7430332 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Biomechanical risk factors of lower back pain in cricket fast bowlers using inertial measurement units: a prospective and retrospective investigation.

Senington Billy B Lee Raymond Y RY Williams Jonathan M JM

BMJ open sport & exercise medicine 20200813 1

<h4>Objectives</h4>To investigate spinal kinematics, tibial and sacral impacts during fast bowling, among bowlers with a history of low back pain (LBP) (retrospective) and bowlers who developed LBP in the follow-up season (prospective).<h4>Methods</h4>35 elite male fast bowlers; senior (n=14; age=24.1±4.3 years; height=1.89±0.05 m; weight=89.2±4.6 kg) and junior (n=21; age=16.9±0.7; height=1.81±0.05; weight=73.0±9.2 kg) were recruited from professional county cricket clubs. LBP history was gathe ...[more]

PMID: 32843992

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundQuantifying lower-limb load and asymmetry during team sport match-play may be important for injury prevention and understanding performance. However, current analysis methods of lower-limb symmetry during match-play employ wearable microtechnology that may not be best suited to the task. A popular microtechnology is global positioning systems (GPS), which are torso worn. The torso location, and the summary workload measures calculated by GPS are not suited to the calculation of lower-limb load. Instead, research grade accelerometers placed directly on the lower-limb may provide better load information than GPS. This study proposes a new technique to quantify external mechanical load, and lower-limb asymmetry during on-field team sport play using inertial measurement units.MethodsFour professional rugby league players (Age: 23.4 ± 3.1 years; Height: 1.89 ± 0.05 m; Mass: 107.0 ± 12.9 kg) wore two accelerometers, one attached to each foot by the boot laces, during match simulations. Custom Matlab (R2017b, The Mathworks Inc, Natick, MA) code was used to calculate total time, area under the curve (AUC), and percentage of time (%Time) spent in seven acceleration categories (negative to very high, <0 g to >16 g), as well as minimum and maximum acceleration during match simulations. Lower-limb AUC and %Time asymmetry was calculated using the Symmetry Angle Equation, which does not require normalization to a reference leg.ResultsThe range of accelerations experienced across all participants on the left and right sides were 15.68-17.53 g, and 16.18-17.69 g, respectively. Clinically significant asymmetry in AUC and %Time was observed for all but one participant, and only in negative (<0 g) and very high accelerations (>16 g). Clinically significant AUC differences in very high accelerations ranged from 19.10%-26.71%. Clinically significant %Time differences in negative accelerations ranged from 12.65%-25.14%, and in very high accelerations from 18.59%-25.30%. All participants experienced the most AUC at very low accelerations (2-4 g), and the least AUC at very high accelerations (165.00-194.00 AU vs. 0.32-3.59 AU). The %Time results indicated that all participants spent the majority of match-play (73.82-92.06%) in extremely low (0-2 g) to low (4-6 g) acceleration intensities, and the least %Time in very high accelerations (0.01%-0.05%).DiscussionA wearable located on the footwear to measure lower-limb load and asymmetry is feasible to use during rugby league match-play. The location of the sensor on the boot is suited to minimize injury risk occurring from impact to the sensor. This technique is able to quantify external mechanical load and detect inter limb asymmetries during match-play at the source of impact and loading, and is therefore likely to be better than current torso based methods. The results of this study may assist in preparing athletes for match-play, and in preventing injury.

Project description:BackgroundOsteoarthritis (OA) and lower back pain (LBP) are most common health problems which lead to pain and disability. This study aimed to systematically review the evidence to find any relationship between knee osteoarthritis (KOA) and LBP or any potential causation.MethodsThe databases of Scopus, MEDLINE, and Embase were searched from inception to 01 October 2022. Any study published in English assessing live humans over 18 years with KOA and LBP was eligible to be included. Studies were independently screened by two researchers. Data of the included studies were extracted based on the participants, outcomes related to knee and lumbar spine, reported association or causation between LBP and KOA, and study design. Data were narratively analyzed and presented as graphs and table. Methodology quality was assessed.ResultsOf 9953 titles and abstracts, duplicates were removed, and 7552 were screened. Altogether, 88 full texts were screened, and 13 were eligible for the final inclusion. There were some biomechanical and clinical causations were observed for the concurrent presence of LBP and KOA. Biomechanically, high pelvic incidence is a risk factor for development of spondylolisthesis and KOA. Clinically, knee pain intensity was higher in KOA when presents with LBP. Less than 20% of studies have justified their sample size during the quality assessment.DiscussionDevelopment and progression of KOA in patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis may be induced by significantly greater mismatches of lumbo-pelvic sagittal alignment. Elderly patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis and severe KOA reported a different pelvic morphology, increased sagittal malalignment with a lack of lumbar lordosis due to double-level listhesis, and greater knee flexion contracture than in patients with no to mild and moderate KOA. People with concurrent LBP and KOA have reported poor function with more disability. Both LBP and lumbar kyphosis indicate functional disability and knee symptoms in patients with KOA.ConclusionsDifferent biomechanical and clinical causations were revealed for the concurrent existence of KOA and LBP. Therefore, careful assessment of both back and knee joints should be considered when treating KOA and vice versa.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42022238571.

Project description:BackgroundInertial measurement units (IMUs) are useful in monitoring running and alerting running-related injuries in various sports settings. However, the quantitative summaries of the validity and reliability of the measurements from IMUs during running are still lacking. The purpose of this review was to investigate the concurrent validity and test-retest reliability of IMUs for measuring gait spatiotemporal outcomes and lower extremity kinematics of health adults during running.MethodsPubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science electronic databases were searched from inception until September 2021. The inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) evaluated the validity or reliability of measurements from IMUs, (2) measured specific kinematic outcomes, (3) compared measurements using IMUs with those obtained using reference systems, (4) collected data during running, (5) assessed human beings and (6) were published in English. Eligible articles were reviewed using a modified quality assessment. A meta-analysis was performed to assess the pooled correlation coefficients of validity and reliability.ResultsTwenty-five articles were included in the systematic review, and data from 12 were pooled for meta-analysis. The methodological quality of studies ranged from low to moderate. Concurrent validity is excellent for stride length (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) (95% confidence interval (CI)) = 0.937 (0.859, 0.972), p < 0.001), step frequency (ICC (95% CI) = 0.926 (0.896, 0.948), r (95% CI) = 0.989 (0.957, 0.997), p < 0.001) and ankle angle in the sagittal plane (r (95% CI) = 0.939 (0.544, 0.993), p = 0.002), moderate to excellent for stance time (ICC (95% CI) = 0.664 (0.354, 0.845), r (95% CI) = 0.811 (0.701, 0.881), p < 0.001) and good for running speed (ICC (95% CI) = 0.848 (0.523, 0.958), p = 0.0003). The summary Fisher's Z value of flight time was not statistically significant (p = 0.13). Similarly, the stance time showed excellent test-retest reliability (ICC (95% CI) = 0.954 (0.903, 0.978), p < 0.001) and step frequency showed good test-retest reliability (ICC (95% CI) = 0.896 (0.837, 0.933), p < 0.001).ConclusionsFindings in the current review support IMUs measurement of running gait spatiotemporal parameters, but IMUs measurement of running kinematics on lower extremity joints needs to be reported with caution in healthy adults.Trial registrationPROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42021279395.

Project description:BackgroundWalking patterns can provide important indications of a person's health status and be beneficial in the early diagnosis of individuals with a potential walking disorder. For appropriate gait analysis, it is critical that natural functional walking characteristics are captured, rather than those experienced in artificial or observed settings. To better understand the extent to which setting influences gait patterns, and particularly whether observation plays a varying role on subjects of different ages, the current study investigates to what extent people walk differently in lab versus real-world environments and whether age dependencies exist.MethodsThe walking patterns of 20 young and 20 elderly healthy subjects were recorded with five wearable inertial measurement units (ZurichMOVE sensors) attached to both ankles, both wrists and the chest. An automated detection process based on dynamic time warping was developed to efficiently identify the relevant sequences. From the ZurichMOVE recordings, 15 spatio-temporal gait parameters were extracted, analyzed and compared between motion patterns captured in a controlled lab environment (10 m walking test) and the non-controlled ecologically valid real-world environment (72 h recording) in both groups.ResultsSeveral parameters (Cluster A) showed significant differences between the two environments for both groups, including an increased outward foot rotation, step width, number of steps per 180° turn, stance to swing ratio, and cycle time deviation in the real-world. A number of parameters (Cluster B) showed only significant differences between the two environments for elderly subjects, including a decreased gait velocity (p = 0.0072), decreased cadence (p = 0.0051) and increased cycle time (p = 0.0051) in real-world settings. Importantly, the real-world environment increased the differences in several parameters between the young and elderly groups.ConclusionElderly test subjects walked differently in controlled lab settings compared to their real-world environments, which indicates the need to better understand natural walking patterns under ecologically valid conditions before clinically relevant conclusions can be drawn on a subject's functional status. Moreover, the greater inter-group differences in real-world environments seem promising regarding the sensitive identification of subjects with indications of a walking disorder.

Project description:Background: Objective gait assessment is key for the follow-up of patients with progressive multiple sclerosis (pMS). Inertial measurement units (IMUs) provide reliable and yet easy quantitative gait assessment in routine clinical settings. However, to the best of our knowledge, no automated step-detection algorithm performs well in detecting severely altered pMS gait. Method: This article elaborates on a step-detection method based on personalized templates tested against a gold standard. Twenty-two individuals with pMS and 10 young healthy subjects (HSs) were instructed to walk on an electronic walkway wearing synchronized IMUs. Templates were derived from the IMU signals by using Initial and Final Contact times given by the walkway. These were used to detect steps from other gait trials of the same individual (intra-individual template-based detection, IITD) or another participant from the same group (pMS or HS) (intra-group template-based detection, IGTD). All participants were seen twice with a 6-month interval, with two measurements performed at each visit. Performance and accuracy metrics were computed, along with a similarity index (SId), which was computed as the mean distance between detected steps and their respective closest template. Results: For HS participants, both the IITD and the IGTD algorithms had precision and recall of 1.00 for detecting steps. For pMS participants, precision and recall ranged from 0.94 to 1.00 for IITD and 0.85 to 0.95 for IGTD depending on the level of disability. The SId was correlated with performance and the accuracy of the result. An SId threshold of 0.957 (IITD) and 0.963 (IGTD) could rule out decreased performance (F-measure ? 0.95), with negative predictive values of 0.99 and 0.96 with the IITD and IGTD algorithms. Also, the SId computed with the IITD and IGTD algorithms could distinguish individuals showing changes at 6-month follow-up. Conclusion: This personalized step-detection method has high performance for detecting steps in pMS individuals with severely altered gait. The algorithm can be self-evaluating with the SI, which gives a measure of the confidence the clinician can have in the detection. What is more, the SId can be used as a biomarker of change in disease severity occurring between the two measurement times.

Dataset Information

Biomechanical risk factors of lower back pain in cricket fast bowlers using inertial measurement units: a prospective and retrospective investigation.

Publications

Biomechanical risk factors of lower back pain in cricket fast bowlers using inertial measurement units: a prospective and retrospective investigation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets