MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997499805 · doi:10.1007/s00167-012-1911-z

Functional knee brace use effect on peak vertical ground reaction forces during drop jump landing

2012· article· en· W1997499805 on OpenAlexaff
Neetu Rishiraj, Jack Taunton, Robert Lloyd-Smith, William D. Regan, Brian Niven, Robert Woollard

Bibliographic record

VenueKnee Surgery Sports Traumatology Arthroscopy · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouver Coastal Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGround reaction forceBraceVertical jumpMedicineBasketballJumpingPhysical therapyJumpMathematicsPhysicsStructural engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to investigate the landing strategies used by non-injured athletes while wearing functional knee braces (FKB, BR condition) during a drop jump task compared with non-injured, non-braced (NBR condition) subjects and also to ascertain whether accommodation to a FKB was possible by non-injured BR subjects. METHODS: Twenty-three healthy male provincial and national basketball and field hockey athletes (age, 19.4 ± 3.0 years) were tested. Each subject was provided with a custom-fitted FKB. Five NBR testing sessions were performed over 3 days followed by five BR testing sessions also over 3 days, for a total of 17.5 h of testing per condition. Each subject performed eight trials of the drop jump task during each testing session per condition. Single-leg peak vertical ground reaction forces (PVGRF) and the time to PVGRF were recorded for each NBR and BR trail. RESULTS: The BR group mean PVGRF at landing was significantly lower (1,628 ± 405 N, 2.1 ± 0.5 BW versus 1,715 ± 403 N, 2.2 ± 0.5 BW, F (1,22) = 6.83, P = 0.01) compared with NBR subjects, respectively. The group mean time to PVGRF was not statistically longer during the BR condition (F (1,22) = 0.967, P = 0.3). Further, an accommodation trend was noted as percent performance difference decreased with continued FKB use. CONCLUSIONS: The significantly lower group mean PVGRF while using a FKB could keep traumatic forces from reaching the ACL until the active neuromuscular restraints are activated to provide protection to the knee joint ligaments. Also, accommodation to FKB is possible after approximately 14.0 h of brace use. The results of this paper will assist clinicians in providing information to their patients regarding a FKB ability to offer protection to an ACL-deficient knee or to address concerns about early muscle fatigue, energy expenditure, heart rate, and decrease in performance level. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prospective study, Level I.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.249 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKnee Surgery Sports Traumatology ArthroscopySame topicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniquesFrench-language works237,207