Injures are common in workers engaged in tactical occupations. Research suggests that the functional movement screen (FMS) may provide practitioners the ability to identify tactical athletes most at risk for injury. However, there exists controversy as to the effectiveness of the FMS as a tool for classifying injury risk. The purpose of the meta-analysis was to determine the predictive value of the FMS in determining injury risk in workers engaged in tactical occupations. We searched MEDLINE, Military & Government Collection (EBSCO), PubMed and National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Technical Information Center databases for articles published between January 2007 and October 2017. Ten studies met the inclusion criteria. Multiple random-effects model meta-analyses were conducted, with an odds ratio as the effects metric. FMS cut-off score, occupation, injury type and sex were used as moderators for the analyses. The odds of injury were greatest for tactical athletes with FMS scores ≤14. Personnel scoring ≤14 had almost 2 times the odds of injury as compared to those scoring >14. However, the magnitude of the effects were small; thus the relationship between FMS cut scores and injury prediction does not support its use as a sole predictor of injury.

No abstract

The use of energy drinks among athletes has risen greatly. Reviews of energy drink related health complications have highlighted adverse cardiovascular events. PURPOSE: To examine the effects of three commercially available energy drinks on resting cardiovascular measures prior to exercise. METHODS: Twenty-five healthy subjects participated in this study. Subjects reported to the laboratory on four separate occasions where they ingested a placebo or one of three commercially available energy drinks (energy drink 1, energy drink 2 and energy drink 3). Trials were conducted subject blinded and counterbalanced. During each trial blood pressure and heart rate were measured at three key points: prior to beverage ingestion, at 30 minutes post ingestion and at 60 minutes post ingestion. Subjects remained seated and in a relaxed state for the duration of the 60 minute trials. Means for dependent measures were analyzed using repeated measures ANOVA with an alpha of 0.05 to determine significance. RESULTS: Heart rate was found to be significantly increased from pre-ingestion measures to 60 minute measures for both energy drink 2 (Pre = 65.12 ± 9.81 bpm and 60 min = 73.08 ± 10.82 bpm at p=0.010) and energy drink 3 (Pre = 65.76 ± 8.44 bpm and 60 min = 73.52 ± 11.25 bpm at p=0.005). Systolic blood pressure was found to be significantly increased from pre-ingestion to 60 minutes for energy drink 1 (Pre = 114.84 ± 9.33 mmHg and 60 min = 120.80 ± 9.43 mmHg at p=0.003), energy drink 2 (Pre = 113.56 ± 8.55 mmHg and 60 min = 121.44 ± 8.86 mmHg at p=0.004), and energy drink 3 (Pre = 113.24 ± 7.09 mmHg and 60 min = 119.40 ± 10.58 mmHg at p=0.037). CONCLUSION: These findings demonstrate that energy drinks impact cardiovascular measures by increasing both heart rate and blood pressure during a resting state. While the demonstrated increases may not be dangerously high, users should be aware of the impact of these drinks on cardiovascular measures.

No abstract

No abstract