Relating Lead Hip Internal Rotation During The Golf Swing To Passive Capacity For Joint Movement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research has suggested that limited hip range of motion (ROM) may contribute to the reporting of low back pain (LBP) among golfers. Particular attention has been paid to the lead hip ROM (i.e. left hip for a right handed golfer), as a large amount of hip internal rotation (IR) is required to complete the golf swing. PURPOSE: To determine if a relationship exists between a golfer’s maximal passive hip IR ROM, and the amount of IR that occurs during the golf swing. METHODS: Ten pain-free male golfers with a current playing handicap of less than 5 were recruited (age = 29.6±5.6 years, height = 1.81±0.05 m, mass = 86.1±13.9 kg, handicap = 0.97±2.3). Three-dimensional kinematics of the feet, shanks, thighs, pelvis, and thorax were recorded (Optotrak Certus, Northern Digital Inc., Waterloo, ON) during passive IR ROM tests, and during 10 golf swings with a driver. All kinematic data were processed using Visual3D (C-Motion Inc., Germantown, MD). Peak IR of the lead hip was extracted from the passive ROM trial, and each golf swing trial. The Pearson product–moment correlation between the peak lead hip IR that occurred during the passive ROM test, and the 10-swing average of the peak hip IR that occurred during the golf swings was assessed using SPSS (SPSS Corporation, Chicago, IL). RESULTS: On average, golfers used 95.4±14.4% of their passive ROM in IR during the golf swing. A significant positive correlation was observed between the passive ROM for the lead hip in IR and the amount of IR on the same hip during the golf swing (p = 0.002, r = 0.854). The slope and intercept for the line-of-best-fit were 0.93 and 1.20 respectively. CONCLUSION: Our data demonstrated a very strong positive relationship between a golfer’s passive hip ROM in IR and the amount of IR used during the golf swing. During the golf swing, participants in this study also approached their physiological capacity for lead hip IR. Golfers with limited hip IR may compensate by using more lumbar spine motion to perform the golf swing, which may be related to the occurrence of LBP. These findings support the need for a comprehensive physical examination and screening of the hip to investigate the potential causes and consequences of LBP in golfers. Therapeutic intervention aimed at improving lead hip IR-ROM, or swing/stance modifications may help prevent and manage LBP experienced by golfers.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".