Suchergebnisse

Background Self-reported data are often used in research studies among military populations. Objective The accuracy of self-reported musculoskeletal injury data among elite military personnel was assessed for issues with recall. Design Cross-sectional study. Setting Applied research laboratory at a military installation. Participants A total of 101 subjects participated (age 28.5±5.6 years). Study participants were active duty military personnel, with no conditions that precluded them from full duty. Primary and secondary outcome measures Self-reported and medical record reviewed injuries that occurred during a 1-year period were matched by anatomic location, injury side (for extremity injuries), and injury year and type. The accuracy of recall was estimated as the per cent of medical record reviewed injuries correctly recalled in the self-report. The effect of injury anatomic location, injury type and severity and time since injury, on recall, was also assessed. Injuries were classified as recent (≤4 years since injury) or old injuries (>4 years since injury). Recall proportions were compared using Fisher's exact tests. Results A total of 374 injuries were extracted from the subjects' medical records. Recall was generally low (12.0%) and was not different between recent and old injuries (P=0.206). Injury location did not affect recall (P=0.418). Recall was higher for traumatic fractures as compared with less severe non-fracture injuries (P values 0.001 to <0.001). Recall for non-fracture injuries was higher for recent as compared with old injuries (P=0.033). This effect of time since injury on recall was not observed for fractures (P=0.522). Conclusions The results of this study highlight the importance of weighing the advantages and disadvantages of self-reported injury data before their use in research studies in military populations and the need for future research to identify modifiable factors that influence recall.

BACKGROUND: The specialized roles of many military personnel require specific skills and high physical demands, placing unique stresses on the shoulders and increasing risk of injury. As normal dominant/nondominant shoulder asymmetries have been established in military personnel, bilateral strength comparisons must be understood in context of daily physical demands to monitor patients' progress or readiness to return to duty. PURPOSE: This study aims to assess bilateral differences in strength and explosive force in United States Marines with a history of dominant or nondominant shoulder pathology. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-Sectional. METHODS: A total of 52 full-duty, male US Marines with a shoulder injury within the prior year participated. Bilateral isokinetic shoulder internal (IR) and external (ER) rotation strength, and peak force (Peak Force) and average rate of force production (Avg Rate) during an explosive push-up were collected. Dominant versus nondominant side data were independently examined within each group (DOM: dominant injury, NOND: nondominant injury). Comparison between DOM and NOND, as well as previously published CON (no history of shoulder injury) was also completed. RESULTS: NOND (n = 26) demonstrated significantly less IR (p < 0.001) and ER (p = 0.003) strength and Peak Force (p = 0.001) and Avg Rate (p = 0.047) on the injured side, while DOM (n = 26) demonstrated no bilateral differences in strength or push-up performance. Comparison between the three groups showed that NOND demonstrated significantly less ER strength than CON (p = 0.022). CONCLUSIONS: Military personnel demonstrate asymmetric strength patterns likely due to increased demand of the dominant shoulder. US Marines with a history of injury to the nondominant shoulder performed differently than those with a dominant side injury, presenting with both strength and push-up asymmetries. They also demonstrated significant ER strength deficits compared to CON. Common clinical practice and previous literature often compare injured and ...

A mode-specific swimming protocol to assess maximal aerobic uptake (VO2maxsw) is vital to accurately evaluate swimming performance. A need exists for reliable and valid swimming protocols that assess VO2maxsw in a flume environment. The purpose was to assess: (a) reliability and (b) "performance" validity of a VO2maxsw flume protocol using the 457-m freestyle pool performance swim (PS) test as the criterion. Nineteen males (n = 9) and females (n = 10) (age, 28.5 ± 8.3 years.; height, 174.7 ± 8.2 cm; mass, 72.9 ± 12.5 kg; %body fat, 21.4 ± 5.9) performed two flume VO2maxsw tests (VO2maxswA and VO2maxswB) and one PS test [457 m (469.4 ± 94.7 s)]. For test–retest reliability (Trials A vs. B), moderately strong relationships were established for VO2maxsw (mL·kg−1·min−1)(r= 0.628, p = 0.002), O2pulse (mL O2·beat−1)(r = 0.502, p = 0.014), VEmax (L·min−1) (r = 0.671, p = 0.001), final test time (sec) (0.608, p = 0.004), and immediate post-test blood lactate (IPE (BLa)) (0.716, p = 0.001). For performance validity, moderately strong relationships (p < 0.05) were found between VO2maxswA (r =−0.648, p = 0.005), O2pulse (r= −0.623, p = 0.008), VEmax (r = −0.509 p = 0.037), and 457-m swim times. The swimming flume protocol examined is a reliable and valid assessment of VO2maxsw., and offers an alternative for military, open water, or those seeking complementary forms of training to improve swimming performance.