The epidemiology of injuries in female soccer has been studied extensively in several national leagues. Even so, data on the first division Spanish league are limited. The objective of this study was to describe the epidemiology of the first division of the Spanish Women’s Soccer League and to analyze data in relation to game position, circumstance, or the moment of injury. Fifteen teams and 123 players participated in the study. Players’ characteristics and their injuries (location, type, diagnosis, circumstance, and moment) were collected. Injuries were described by their frequencies (number and percentage) and incidence rates (IR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Lower limb injuries accounted for 86.8% of total injuries. Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and meniscus injuries occurred in totality in non-contact circumstance (0.35/1000 h; 95% CI, 0.18 to 0.62 and 0.23/1000 h; 95% CI, 0.10 to 0.45, respectively). Match injury IRs (19.02/1000 h; 95% CI, 14.89 to 23.97) were significantly higher than training (1.70/1000 h; 95% CI, 1.27 to 2.22). As a conclusion, structures such as the ACL or meniscus are most commonly injured in the non-contact circumstance in the first division of the Spanish Women’s Soccer League. In addition, match situations involve a greater risk of injury than training, increasing the risk to the ankle and knee injuries as the season progresses.

Background Inertial hamstring exercises promote functional changes leading to lower rates of hamstring injuries. However, variable training measurement systems have not been specifically validated for hamstring exercises. Accordingly, this study aimed to evaluate the validity of the Inertial Measurement System (IMS) to measure the velocity, force, and power during the performance of different hamstring exercises on a flywheel resistance training device. Methods Fifteen males (average age: 22.4 ± 2.5 years; body mass: 77.3 ± 9.8 kg; height: 179.5 ± 7.4 cm; weekly physical activity: 434.0 ± 169.2 min; years of strength training: 4.3 ± 2.2 years) performed the bilateral stiff-leg deadlift (SDL), 45° hip extension (HE), and unilateral straight knee bridge (SKB) in two sessions (familiarization and evaluation) with a 1-week interval between them. The velocity, force, and power (average and peak values) in the concentric and eccentric phases for each of the exercises were recorded simultaneously with IMS and MuscleLab. Results Consistency between IMS and MuscleLab was good to excellent for all variables, with r ranges from 0.824 to 0.966 in SDL, from 0.822 to 0.971 in HE, and from 0.806 to 0.969 in SKB. Acceptable levels of agreement between devices were observed in general for all exercises, the “bias” ranging from 1.1% to 13.2%. Although MuscleLab showed higher values than IMS for peak velocity, force and power values, the effect size was only relevant for 5 of the 36 parameters. IMS is a new and valid system to monitor inertial hamstring exercises on a new flywheel device. In this way, IMS could have potential practical applications for any professional or athlete who wants to monitor inertial hamstring exercises.

Background Neck pain has a high annual incidence and decreases the cervical active range of motion (ROM). Clinicians use various methods to evaluate cervical range of motion (CROM) that some of them have also been proposed to give instant feedback. Accordingly, this study aimed to examine the validity and reliability of Veloflex (VF) to measure the CROM by comparison with the cervical range of motion (CROM) device, and to examine their test-retest reliability. Methods Thirty-eight healthy and 20 symptomatic participants were evaluated. Cervical flexion-extension, side bending, and rotations were tested in two sessions, first by the CROM and VF and in the second only with the VF. To evaluate the concurrent validity and agreement between CROM and VF, Pearson correlation coefficient (r) and Bland–Altmann plots were used. Reliability were evaluated using intra-class correlation (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM) and minimal detectable change (MDC). Results CROM and VF showed excellent correlation for all movements (r > 0.960). Both devices provided small mean ‘bias’ (≤1.29%) in all movements regarding CROM measures. The intra-rater and inter-rater reliability of the VF was excellent (ICC > 0.98). SEMs ranging from 0.72% to 2.38% and the MDC ranging from 1.22° to 2.60° in all participants. The results support the validity and reliability of VF to measure CROM. For its use, with a basic training is enough to get reliable measurements.

Background Balance and strength training are frequent strategies to address lower limb injuries, including ankle injuries, which are usually performed in single-leg stance on global instability devices, producing generalized muscular activation of the lower limb. In this context, new specific instability devices arise from the need to selectively work the ankle, specifically the peroneus longus. This study aimed to compare the EMG muscle activation of the peroneus longus, as well as other lower limbs muscles, in a single-leg stance on different balance training devices (BOSU, wobble board, power board, and Blackboard) in standing or squatting positions. Methods Twenty healthy recreationally trained subjects participated in the study. Subjects performed three repetitions of 15 s (one for familiarization and two for measurement) in standing and squatting positions on the floor, BOSU, wobble board, power board, and Blackboard. Surface electromyography (EMG) was used to record activity of the peroneus longus, soleus, gastrocnemius medialis, tibialis anterior, rectus femoris, and gluteus maximus. Results The main outcome was that no differences were found for the peroneus longus normalized EMG, neither between devices (p = 0.09) nor between conditions (p = 0.11), nor in the interaction between them (p = 0.16). For the normalized EMG of the other muscles, there were multiple differences between devices and conditions. Of the devices studied, the Blackboard was the one that implied a lower activation of the lower limb muscles and a lower degree of instability, activating the peroneus longus similarly to global instability devices. The BOSU and wobble board achieved high levels of EMG muscle activation for most muscles of the lower limbs. Therefore, they should be considered as potential devices for work in highly unstable conditions or when high activation levels are sought.

Background: Hamstring injury prevention programs include strengthening, especially eccentric exercises using both gravitational and inertial loading. Inertial exercises are characterized by eccentric contractions of high intensity and velocity. This study aimed to analyze the muscular activation of the biceps femoris (BF), semitendinosus (ST), gluteus maximus (GM), and gracilis (GC) muscles during hip extension (HE) exercises performed under both gravitational and inertial loading conditions. Hypothesis: Inertial training would generate a greater activation of HE muscles than gravitational training. Study Design: Cross-sectional study. Level of Evidence: Level 4. Methods: Fifteen resistance-trained men performed the unilateral straight knee bridge (SKB), 45° of HE, and stiff-leg deadlift (SDL) exercises under gravitational and inertial loading conditions. Concentric and eccentric phases were identified with a linear encoder. Differences between load types, exercises, and their interaction were examined to establish the electromyographic (EMG) activity of each muscle and BF/ST ratio. Results: In the concentric phase, inertial loading showed a higher normalized EMG than gravitational loading for BF, ST, and GM. SKB and HE activated BF and ST between 9.6% and 24.3% more than SDL. In the eccentric phase, the inertial modality achieved greater GM activation than the gravitational form (18.1%). BF activation was increased with HE and SKB as compared with SDL (24.4% and 16.4%, respectively), while ST activation was likewise enhanced with HE as compared with SDL (15.1%). Conclusion: Inertial training is more effective than gravitational training for the concentric activation of the hamstring muscles while SDL showed lower hamstring activation than HE and SKB. Therefore, HE and SKB with inertial loading should be taken into account in hamstring training programs. Clinical Relevance: Inertial training is more effective than gravitational training for the concentric activation of the hamstring muscles. HE and SKB with inertial loading should be taken into account in hamstring training programs.