Browse

You are looking at 41 - 50 of 280 items for :

  • Athletic Training, Therapy, and Rehabilitation x
  • Refine by Access: Content accessible to me x
Clear All
Open access

John H. Challis

Open access

Patricia R. Roby, Robert C. Lynall, Michael J. Cools, Stephen W. Marshall, Janna C. Fonseca, James R. Stevens, and Jason P. Mihalik

We report on hyperbaric oxygen (HBO2) therapy used to improve postinjury outcomes in eight acutely concussed high school student-athletes (5 males, 3 females, mean age = 16.0 ± 1.2 years). Patients were randomly assigned into one of three intervention groups: (a) HBO2 therapy; (b) hyperbaric therapy with compressed medical-grade air (HBA); or (c) normobaric 100% O2 therapy. All patients completed five 1-hr treatments within the first 10 days following his or her concussion. Main outcome measures included mental status examination, symptom burden, and the number of days from injury until the physician permitted the student-athlete to return to activity. Patients receiving HBO2 treatment experienced the greatest absolute symptom reduction over the five treatment sessions. No meaningful differences were found in mental status examination. All participants returned to activity in a similar timeframe. HBO2 therapy may be an effective option for the acute treatment of postconcussion symptoms, particularly in young athletes presenting with a high symptom burden.

Open access

Olivia Bartlett and James L. Farnsworth II

Clinical Scenario: Kinesiophobia is a common psychological phenomenon that occurs following injury involving fear of movement. These psychological factors contribute to the variability among patients’ perceived disability scores following injury. In addition, the psychophysiological, behavioral, and cognitive factors of kinesiophobia have been shown to be predictive of a patient’s self-reported disability and pain. Previous kinesiophobia research has mostly focused on lower-extremity injuries. There are fewer studies that investigate upper-extremity injuries despite the influence that upper-extremity injuries can have on an individual’s activities of daily living and, therefore, disability scores. The lack of research calls for a critical evaluation and appraisal of available evidence regarding kinesiophobia and its contribution to perceived disability for the upper-extremity. Focused Clinical Question: How does kinesiophobia in patients with upper-extremity injuries influence perceptions of disability and quality of life measurements? Summary of Key Findings: Two cross-sectional studies and one cohort study were included. The first study found a positive relationship between kinesiophobia and a high degree of perceived disability. Another study found that kinesiophobia and catastrophic thinking scores were the most important predictors of perceived upper-extremity disability. The third study found that kinesiophobia contributes to self-reported disability in the shoulder. Clinical Bottom Line: There is moderate evidence that supports the relationship between kinesiophobia and perceived disability, and the relationship between elevated perceptions of disability and increased kinesiophobia scores in patients with an upper-extremity injury. Clinicians should evaluate and monitor kinesiophobia in patients following injury, a condition that can enhance perceptions of disability. An elevated perception of disability can create a cycle of fear that leads to hypervigilance and fear-avoidance behavior. Strength of Recommendation: Consistent findings from reviewed studies suggest there is grade B evidence to support that kinesiophobia is related to an increased perceived disability following upper-extremity injuries.

Open access

Jeffrey B. Driban and Patrick O. McKeon

Open access

Emilie N. Miley, Ashley J. Reeves, Madeline P. Casanova, Nickolai J.P. Martonick, Jayme Baker, and Russell T. Baker

Context: Total Motion Release® (TMR®) is a novel treatment paradigm used to restore asymmetries in the body (eg, pain, tightness, limited range of motion). Six primary movements, known as the Fab 6, are performed by the patient and scored using a 0 to 100 scale. Clinicians currently utilize the TMR® scale to modify treatment, assess patient progress, and measure treatment effectiveness; however, the reliability of the TMR® scale has not been determined. It is imperative to assess scale reliability and establish minimal detectable change (MDC) values to guide clinical practice. Objective: To assess the reliability of the TMR® scale and establish MDC values for each motion in healthy individuals in a group setting. Design: Retrospective analysis of group TMR® assessments. Setting: University classroom. Participants: A convenience sample of 61 students (23 males and 38 females; 25.48 [5.73] y), with (n = 31) and without (n = 30) previous exposure to TMR®. Intervention: The TMR® Fab 6 movements were tested at 2 time points, 2 hours apart. A clinician with previous training in TMR® led participant groups through both sessions while participants recorded individual motion scores using the 0 to 100 TMR® scale. Test–retest reliability was calculated using an intraclass correlation coefficient (2,1) for inexperienced, experienced, and combined student groups. Standard error of measurement and MDC values were also assessed for each intraclass correlation coefficient. Outcome Measure: Self-reported scores on the TMR® scale. Results: Test–retest reliability ranged from 0.57 to 0.95 across the Fab 6 movements, standard error of measurement values ranged from 4.85 to 11.77, and MDC values ranged from 13.45 to 32.62. Conclusion: The results indicate moderate to excellent reliability across the Fab 6 movements and a range of MDC values. Although this study is the first step in assessing the reliability of the TMR® scale for clinical practice, caution is warranted until further research is completed to establish reliability and MDC values of the TMR® scale in various settings to better guide patient care.

Open access

Jack P. Callaghan

Open access

Samuel C. Fischer, Darren Q. Calley, and John H. Hollman

Clinical Scenario : Low back pain is a common condition for the general population with 29% of adults having low back pain within the last 3 months. A deadlift is described as a free weight exercise in which a barbell is lifted from the floor in a continuous motion by extending the knees and hips. For those without low back pain, the deadlift was found to have the highest muscle activation of paraspinal musculature compared with other exercises. There are a limited number of studies that investigate the usefulness of incorporating deadlifts as part of a rehabilitation program for low back pain. Clinical Question: For those who live with low back pain, is an exercise routine that includes a deadlift a viable treatment option to improve pain and/or function? Summary of Key Findings: The literature search yielded 3 total studies meeting the inclusion and exclusion criteria: 1 randomized control trial, 1 secondary analysis of a randomized control trial, and 1 cohort study. Exercise programs that include deadlifts can yield improvements in both pain and function for those living with low back pain but were not found to be more beneficial than low load motor control exercises. Those with lower pain levels and higher baseline lumbar extension strength may be most appropriate to participate in an exercise program that includes deadlifts. Further research is needed to compare exercise programs that include deadlifts to other interventions for those living with low back pain. Clinical Bottom Line: There is minimal evidence that exercise programs that included deadlifts are a clinically effective option for the treatment of low back pain for both pain scores and functional outcome measures. Strength of Recommendation: Level B evidence exists that exercise programs that include deadlifts are a clinically effective option for the treatment of low back pain for both pain scores and functional outcome measures.

Open access

Scott Benson Street, Matthew Rawlins, and Jason Miller

Clinical Scenario: Ankle fractures are a frequent occurrence, and they carry the potential for syndesmosis injury. The syndesmosis is important to the structural integrity of the ankle joint by maintaining the proximity of the tibia, fibula, and talus. Presently, the gold standard for treating an ankle syndesmosis injury is to insert a metallic screw through the fibula and into the tibia. This technique requires a second intervention to remove the hardware, but also carries an inherent risk of breaking the screw during rehabilitation. Another fixation technique, the Tightrope, has gained popularity in treating ankle syndesmosis injuries. The TightRope involves inserting Fiberwire® through the tibia and fibula, which allows for stabilization of the ankle mortise and normal range of motion. Clinical Question: In patients suffering from ankle syndesmosis injuries, is the Tightrope ankle syndesmosis fixation system more effective than conventional screw fixation at improving return to work, pain, and patient-reported outcome measures? Summary of Key Findings: Five studies were selected to be critically appraised. The PEDro checklist was used to score 2 randomized control trials, and the Downs & Black checklist was used to score the cohort study on methodology and consistency. Two systematic reviews were also appraised. All 5 articles demonstrated support for using the TightRope fixation. Clinical Bottom Line: There is moderate evidence to support the use of the TightRope syndesmosis fixation system, as it provides both clinician- and patient-reported outcomes that are similar to those using the conventional metallic screw, with a shortened time to recover and return to activity. Strength of Recommendation: Grade A evidence exists in support of using the TightRope fixation system in place of the metallic screw following ankle syndesmosis injury.

Open access

Gemma N. Parry, Lee C. Herrington, Ian G. Horsley, and Ian Gatt

Context: Maximal power describes the ability to immediately produce power with the maximal velocity at the point of release, impact, and/or take off—the greater an athlete’s ability to produce maximal power, the greater the improvement of athletic performance. In reference to boxing performance, regular consistent production of high muscular power during punching is considered an essential prerequisite. Despite the importance of upper limb power to athletic performance, presently, there is no gold standard test for upper limb force development performance. Objective: To investigate the test–retest reliability of the force plate–derived measures of countermovement push-up in elite boxers. Design: Test–retest design. Setting: High Performance Olympic Training Center. Participants: Eighteen elite Olympic boxers (age = 23 [3] y; height = 1.68 [0.39] m; body mass = 70.0 [17] kg). Intervention: Participants performed 5 repetitions of countermovement push-up trials on FD4000 Forcedeck dual force platforms on 2 separate test occasions 7 days apart. Main Outcome Measures: Peak force, mean force, flight time, rate of force development, impulse, and vertical stiffness of the bilateral and unilateral limbs from the force–time curve. Results: No significant differences between the 2 trial occasions for any of the derived bilateral or unilateral performance measures. Intraclass correlation coefficients indicated moderate to high reliability for performance parameters (intraclass correlation coefficients = .68–.98) and low coefficient of variation (3%–10%) apart from vertical stiffness (coefficient of variation = 16.5%–25%). Mean force demonstrated the greatest reliability (coefficient of variation = 3%). In contrast, no significant differences (P < .001) were noted between left and right limbs (P = .005–.791), or between orthodox or southpaw boxing styles (P = .19–.95). Conclusion: Force platform–derived kinetic bilateral and unilateral parameters of countermovement push-up are reliable measures of upper limb power performance in elite-level boxers; results suggest unilateral differences within the bilateral condition are not the norm for an elite boxing cohort.

Open access

Dhinu J. Jayaseelan, Cesar Fernandez-de-las-Penas, Taylor Blattenberger, and Dean Bonneau

Clinical Scenario: Plantar heel pain is a common condition frequently associated with persistent symptoms and functional limitations affecting both the athletic and nonathletic populations. Common interventions target impairments at the foot and ankle and local drivers of symptoms. If symptoms are predominantly perpetuated by alterations in central pain processing, addressing peripheral impairments alone may not be sufficient. Clinical Question: Do individuals with chronic plantar heel pain demonstrate signs potentially associated with altered central pain processing? Summary of Key Findings: After searching 6 electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, SportDiscus, Cochrane, and PEDro) and filtering titles based on predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria, 4 case-control studies were included. All studies scored highly on the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for quality assessment. Using pressure pain thresholds, each study found decreased pressure pain hypersensitivity locally and at a remote site compared to control groups, suggesting the presence, to some extent, of altered nociceptive pain processing. Clinical Bottom Line: In the studies reviewed, reported results suggest a possible presence of centrally mediated symptoms in persons with plantar heel pain. However, despite findings from these studies, limitations in appropriate matching based on body mass index and measures used suggest additional investigation is warranted. Strength of Recommendation: According to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, there is evidence level C to suggest chronic plantar heel pain is associated with alterations in central pain processing.