Mark Sayers

BACKGROUND: Altering the horizontal position of the weight in a backpack will influence the magnitude of the external torque it creates but the effect on posture is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To use photogrammetry to determine if changes in the horizontal position of a fixed backpack weight affect external measures of craniovertebral posture in 150 asymptomatic young adults. METHODS: A backpack was attached to a steel frame with a bar protruding posteriorly. A fixed load (5% body mass) was placed at three distances along the bar - 0 m, 0.20 m, and 0.40 m. Sagittal and frontal plane photogrammetry was used to measure the craniovertebral angle (CVA), upper cervical gaze angle (UCGA) and lateral head tilt angle (LHTA). A comparison was made across unloaded (no backpack) and loaded conditions. RESULTS: There was a significant decrease in the CVA between unloaded and loaded conditions. Changes in the UCGA were small and, while significant, may not have practical importance. There were no differences in the LHTA between the conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Changes in the horizontal position of a fixed load affect external measures of craniovertebral posture so consideration needs to be given to not only the weight of a backpack but how the weight is positioned within the backpack.

This research assessed the influence of various heel elevation conditions on spinal kinematic and kinetic data during loaded (25% and 50% of body weight) high-bar back squats. Ten novice (mass 67.6±12.4 kg, height 1.73±0.10 m) and ten regular weight trainers (mass 66.0±10.7 kg, height 1.71±0.09 m) completed eight repetitions at each load wearing conventional training shoes standing on the flat level floor (LF) and on an inclined board (EH). The regular weight training group performed an additional eight repetitions wearing weightlifting shoes (WS). Statistical parametric mapping (SPM1D) and repeated measures analysis of variance were used to assess differences in spinal curvature and kinetics across the shoe/floor conditions and loads. SPM1D analyses indicated that during the LF condition the novice weight trainers had greater moments around L4/L5 than the regular weight trainers during the last 20% of the lift (P < 0.05), with this difference becoming non-significant during the EH condition. This study indicates that from a perspective of spinal safety, it appears advantageous for novice weight trainers to perform back squats with their heels slightly elevated, while regular weight trainers appear to realize only limited benefits performing back squats with either EH or WS.

This project examined the interrelationships between power production and upper body kinematics during a series of medicine ball push-press (MBP-P) throws. Twenty-five regular weight trainers (body mass = 86±10 kg) performed a series of ballistic vertical MBP-P throws at loads representing 5% and 10% of their assessed 5RM bench press. Throws were performed lying supine on a force platform (1 kHz) with upper body kinematics assessed using standard infra-red motion capture techniques (0.5 kHz). Gross measures of performance and power production such as peak vertical ball velocity (Velpeak), peak force (Fpeak) and power (Ppeak) were recorded during the propulsive phase of the movement. Comparative analyses indicated that despite significant reductions in Velpeak from the 5% to 10% loads (P < 0.001), Fpeak remained largely unchanged (P = 0.167). Analysis of inter-trial variability showed that the gross measures of performance and power were relatively stable (Coefficient of Variation [CV%] <13%), while most upper limb segmental kinematics varied considerably between trials (CV% up to 70%). This project highlights the complexity of the relationships between power production and upper body kinematics during light load ballistic MBP-P throwing. Additionally, it shows how trained athletes can achieve similar outcomes during ballistic movements using a variety of movement strategies.

Objectives: This study examined whether young (15-19 years old) high-performance netball players exhibit different landing mechanics compared to female controls who do not participate in sports requiring frequent landings. Design: Comparative, cross-sectional. Method: Lower limb kinematics and kinetics from 23 youth high performance female netball players (age: 17.5±1.7 years, height: 1.77±0.06 m, mass: 66.5±6.33 kg, netball experience: 8.5±2.3 years) were compared to data from 23 females (age: 22.0±3.2 years, height: 1.70±0.05 m, mass: 64.4±6.7 kg) who were involved in competitive sport, but had minimal experience playing a jump-landing sport. The jump landing task required participants to perform a countermovement jump and grab a netball suspended at 85% of the participant's maximum jump height. On random trials the ball was raised rapidly to 100% maximum jump height as the participant initiated her jump. Results: The netball group landed with significantly less contribution from the knee extensors to total work for the non-preferred leg (P < .001, ds = 1.10) than the inexperienced group. Although no other significant differences were found between groups, there were several small to moderate differences in several of the key biomechanical variables identified as being risk factors for ACL injury or associated with ACL strain. Conclusion: Both groups had similar knee valgus and internal rotation angles and moments, with nearly all participants presenting with relatively poor frontal plane knee control. Overall, results suggest that experience playing a netball may not be enough to develop low-risk landing mechanics.

When assessing biomechanics in a laboratory setting, task selection is critical to the production of accurate and meaningful data. The injury biomechanics of landing is commonly investigated in a laboratory setting using a drop landing task. However, why this task is so frequently chosen is unclear. Therefore, this narrative review aimed to (1) identify the justification/s provided within the published literature as to why a drop landing task was selected to investigate the injury biomechanics of landing in sport and (2) use current research evidence, supplemented by a new set of biomechanical data, to evaluate whether the justifications are supported. To achieve this, a comprehensive literature search using Scopus, PubMed, and SPORTDiscus online databases was conducted for studies that had collected biomechanical data relating to sport injuries using a drop landing task. In addition, kinematic and kinetic data were collected from female netball players during drop landings and maximum-effort countermovement jumps from the ground to grab a suspended ball. The literature search returned a total of 149 articles that were reviewed to determine the justification for selecting a drop landing task. Of these, 54% provided no explicit justification to explain why a drop landing task was chosen, and 15% stated it was selected because it had been used in previous research. Other reasons included that the drop landing provides high experimental control (16%), is a functional sports task (11%), and is a dynamic task (6%). Evidence in the literature suggests that the biomechanical data produced with drop landings may not be as externally valid as more sport-specific tasks. Biomechanical data showed that the drop landing may not control center of mass fall height any better than maximum-effort countermovement jumps from the ground. Further, the frequently used step-off technique to initiate drop landings resulted in kinematic and kinetic asymmetries between lower limbs, which would otherwise be symmetrical when performing a countermovement jump from the ground. Researchers should consider the limitations of a drop landing task and endeavor to improve the laboratory tasks used to collect biomechanical data to examine the injury biomechanics of landing.