Isokinetic strength testing does not predict hamstring injury in Australian Rules footballers

258Citations
Citations of this article
395Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objective - To determine the relation of hamstring and quadriceps muscle strength and imbalance to hamstring injury using a prospective observational cohort study. Method - A total of 102 senior male Australian Rules footballers aged 22.2 (3.6) years were tested at the start of a football season. Maximum voluntary concentric and eccentric torque of the hamstring and quadriceps muscles of both legs was assessed using a Kin-Com isokinetic dynamometer at angular velocities of 60 and 180 degrees/second. Twelve (11.8%) players sustained clinically diagnosed hamstring strains which caused them to miss one or more matches over the ensuing season. Results - There were no significant differences for any of the isokinetic variables comparing the injured and non-injured legs in players with unilateral hamstring strains (n = 9). Neither the injured nor the non-injured leg of injured players differed from the mean of left and right legs in non-injured players for any isokinetic variable. The hamstring to opposite hamstring ratios also did not differ between injured and non-injured players. A hamstring to opposite hamstring ratio of less than 0.90 and a hamstring to quadriceps ratio of less than 0.60 were not associated with an increased risk of hamstring injury. A significantly greater percentage of players who sustained a hamstring strain reported a history of hamstring strain compared with non-injured players (p = 0.02). However, this was not related to muscle weakness or imbalance. Conclusions - Isokinetic muscle strength testing was not able to directly discriminate Australian Rules football players at risk for a hamstring injury.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Bennell, K. (1998). Isokinetic strength testing does not predict hamstring injury in Australian Rules footballers. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 32(4), 309–314. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsm.32.4.309

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free