Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 3 of 3 items for

  • Author: Thomas H. Kelly x
  • Refine by Access: All Content x
Clear All Modify Search
Restricted access

Thomas H. Kelly and Carl G. Mattacola


The National Institutes of Health's Clinical and Translational Science Award initiative is designed to establish and promote academic centers of clinical and translational science (CTS) that are empowered to train and advance multi- and interdisciplinary investigators and research teams to apply new scientific knowledge and techniques to enhance patient care. Among the key components of a full-service center for CTS is an educational platform to support research training in CTS. Educational objectives and resources available to support the career development of the clinical and translational scientists, including clinical research education, mentored research training, and career development support, are described.


The purpose of the article is to provide an overview of the CTS educational model so that rehabilitation specialists can become more aware of potential resources that are available and become more involved in the delivery and initiation of the CTS model in their own workplace. Rehabilitation clinicians and scientists are well positioned to play important leadership roles in advancing the academic mission of CTS. Rigorous academic training in rehabilitation science serves as an effective foundation for supporting the translation of basic scientific discovery into improved health care. Rehabilitation professionals are immersed in patient care, familiar with interdisciplinary health care delivery, and skilled at working with multiple health care professionals.


The NIH Clinical and Translational Science Award initiative is an excellent opportunity to advance the academic development of rehabilitation scientists.

Restricted access

Kathleen A. Swanik, Stephen J. Thomas, Aaron H. Struminger, Kellie C. Huxel Bliven, John D. Kelly, and Charles B. Swanik


Plyometric training is credited with providing benefits in performance and dynamic restraint. However, limited prospective data exist quantifying kinematic adaptations such as amortization time, glenohumeral rotation, and scapulothoracic position, which may underlie the efficacy of plyometric training for upper-extremity rehabilitation or performance enhancement.


To measure upper-extremity kinematics and plyometric phase times before and after an 8-wk upper-extremity strength- and plyometric-training program.


Randomized pretest–posttest design.


Research laboratory.


40 recreationally active men (plyometric group, age 20.43 ± 1.40 y, height 180.00 ± 8.80 cm, weight 73.07 ± 7.21 kg; strength group, age 21.95 ± 3.40 y, height 173.98 ± 11.91 cm, weight 74.79 ± 13.55 kg).


Participants were randomly assigned to either a strength-training group or a strength- and plyometric-training group. Each participant performed the assigned training for 8 wk.

Main Outcome Measures:

Dynamic and static glenohumeral and scapular-rotation measurements were taken before and after the training programs. Dynamic measurement of scapular rotation and time spent in each plyometric phase (concentric, eccentric, and amortization) during a ball-toss exercise were recorded while the subjects were fitted with an electromagnetic tracking system. Static measures included scapular upward rotation at 3 different glenohumeral-abduction angles, glenohumeral internal rotation, and glenohumeral external rotation.


Posttesting showed that both groups significantly decreased the time spent in the amortization, concentric, and eccentric phases of a ball-toss exercise (P < .01). Both groups also exhibited significantly decreased static external rotation and increased dynamic scapular upward rotation after the training period (P < .01). The only difference between the training protocols was that the plyometric-training group exhibited an increase in internal rotation that was not present in the strength-training group (P < .01).


These findings support the use of both upper-extremity plyometrics and strength training for reducing commonly identified upper-extremity-injury risk factors and improving upper-extremity performance.

Restricted access

JoAnn Kuo, Kathryn H. Schmitz, Kelly R. Evenson, Thomas L. McKenzie, Jared B. Jobe, Ariane L. Rung, Joel Gittelsohn, and Russell R. Pate


With limited opportunities for physical activity during school hours, it is important to understand the contexts of physical activities done outside of school time. Given the importance of physical and social aspects of environments, the purpose of this study was to describe where and with whom girls participate in physical activities outside of school.


Participants were 1925 sixth-grade girls in the Trial of Activity for Adolescent Girls (TAAG). At baseline, they completed a 3-day physical activity recall (3DPAR), reporting the main activity performed during 30-minute intervals and the physical and social contexts of physical activities.


The most frequently reported physical activities done outside of school time were house chores, walking (for transportation or exercise), dance, basketball, playing with younger children, and running or jogging. The most common location for these activities was at home or in the neighborhood. With the exception of household chores, these activities were typically done with at least one other person.


Interventions that promote physical activities that can be done at or around home or developing supportive social networks for physical activity would be consistent with the current physical activity contexts of adolescent girls.