Screening Tools as a Predictor of Injury in Dance: Systematic Literature Review and Meta-analysis

Armstrong, Ross; Relph, Nicola

doi:10.1186/s40798-018-0146-z

Cited by 36 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A previous review of injury screening tools in dance [18] utilised a 20-point scoring system and the authors provided permission for use of this tool in the current review. This scoring tool was developed from a previously published screening tool in team sports [19] and modified version Cochrane Group on Screening and Diagnostic Test Methodology (Cochrane methods) [20].…”

Section: Methodological Qualitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In one study, the diagnosis was provided by a "certified athletic trainer, physical therapist, physician or chiropractor" [1]. As a minimum, it is recommended that studies should provide a definition of musculoskeletal injury and have the diagnosis made by a medical professional ideally a physical therapist/physiotherapist or doctor as self-reporting by athletes has a greater potential for misdiagnosis [18].…”

Section: Methodological Qualitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Screening Tools as a Predictor of Injury in Gymnastics: Systematic Literature Review

Armstrong

Relph

2021

Sports Med - Open

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Gymnastics requires a high level of physical ability and technical skill which utilises short sets of athleticism and artistry to perform complex and intense movements which can overload musculoskeletal tissues and result in acute injuries which can develop into chronic injuries. The aim of this systematic literature review was to investigate which screening tools predict injury in gymnasts and encompasses all genres, levels and ages. Methods An electronic search of seven databases from their inception until March 2021 was conducted. The databases were the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, CINAHL, eBook Collection (EBSCOhost), MEDLINE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, SPORTDiscus and PEDro (the Physiotherapy Evidence Base). A combination of the following search terms was used: (1) Gymnastics AND injury AND Screening, (2) Screening AND Gymnastics and (3) Musculoskeletal AND Screening AND Gymnastics. These terms were searched in all text, abstract, title and subject terms. Studies were assessed using a 20-point scoring tool. Results The mean methodological quality score was 13.1 points (range 10–17 points). Range of motion, anthropometric and postural measurements, hypermobility, clinical diagnostic tests, movement screening tools, muscle strength, power and endurance were reported in the included studies. Some evidence existed for screening measurement of height and mass as taller and heavier gymnasts might be more susceptible to injury; however, the different methodologies utilised and lack of acknowledgment of confounding variables limit the clinical relevance of these findings. Conclusions Height and mass should be recorded during the screening process. A lack of heterogeneity in study methodology prevented a meta-analysis. Studies were limited by a lack of prospective injury design, poor injury definition, self-reporting of injury and only 2 studies reported reliability of screening tools. Further research is required to determine the role of injury screening in gymnastics. Registration: The review protocol was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) with the registration number CRD42020218339.

show abstract

Section: Methodological Qualitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodological Qualitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Screening Tools as a Predictor of Injury in Gymnastics: Systematic Literature Review

Armstrong

Relph

2021

Sports Med - Open

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Association between these static postural assessments and associated back pain/injury has not been validated. Based on comparable systematic reviews 1,19,28 and relevant clinical commentary, 11,42 referenced outcome tools were divided into clinical constructs to comprehensively screen for injury risk in elite swimmers. These constructs include: (1) mobility, (2) strength/endurance, (3) static and dynamic postures, and (4) patient report (Figure 2).…”

Section: Spinementioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical Evaluation Techniques for Injury Risk Assessment in Elite Swimmers: A Systematic Review

Schlueter

Pintar

Wayman

et al. 2020

Sports Health: A Multidisciplinary Approach

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context: Evidence concerning a systematic, comprehensive injury risk assessment in the elite swimming population is scarce. Objective: To evaluate the quality of current literature regarding clinical assessment techniques used to evaluate the presence and/or development of pain/injury in elite swimmers and to categorize objective clinical assessment tools into relevant predictors (constructs) that should consistently be evaluated in injury risk screens of elite swimmers. Data Sources: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, PEDro, and the Cochrane Library Reviews were searched through September 2018. Study Selection: Studies were included for review if they assessed a correlation between clinic-based objective measures and the presence and/or development of acute or chronic pain/injury in elite swimmers. All body regions were included. Elite swimmers were defined as National Collegiate Athletic Association, collegiate, and junior-, senior-, or national-level swimmers. Only cohort and cross-sectional studies were included (both prospective and retrospective); randomized controlled trials, expert opinion, and case reports were excluded, along with studies that focused on interventions, performance, or specific swim-stroke equipment or technology. Study Design: Systematic review and qualitative analysis. Level of Evidence: Level 3. Data Extraction: PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines were utilized at each phase of review by 2 reviewers; a third reviewer was utilized for tie breaking purposes. Qualitative analysis was performed using the Methodological Items for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) assessment tool. Results: A total of 21 studies assessed the presence and/or development of injury/pain in 3 different body regions: upper extremity, lower extremity, and spine. Calculated average MINORS scores for comparative (n = 17) and noncomparative (n = 4) studies were 18.1 of 24 and 10.5 of 16, respectively. Modifiable, objectively measurable injury risk factors in elite swimmers were categorized into 4 constructs: (1) strength/endurance, (2) mobility, (3) static/dynamic posture, and (4) patient-report regardless of body region. Conclusion: Limited evidence exists to draw specific correlations between identified clinical objective measures and the development of pain and/or injury in elite swimmers.

show abstract

“…24 The use of activity specific screening has been identified as beneficial in determining movements that may relate to injury. 25 Within golf the Titleist Performance Institute golf specific functional movement screening (GSFMS) has been developed 26,27 which assesses a golfer's flexibility, strength and balance using 17 different tests in golf specific postures to identify physical limitations which may influence swing performance. 27 Only one previous study has investigated the relationship between the GSFMS and performance, Gulgin et al (2014) 27 utilised 12 different tests of strength, flexibility and balance to investigate the relationship between these movements and 14 different golf swing faults.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Relationship Between the Golf-Specific Movement Screen and Golf Performance

Speariett¹,

Armstrong²

2020

Journal of Sport Rehabilitation

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context: Golf requires effective movement patterns to produce an effective swing and performance. Objective: To determine the relationship between the Titleist Performance Institute golf-specific functional movement screening (GSFMS) composite and individual element scores and golf performance by assessing a player’s handicap, clubhead speed, side accuracy, ball speed, peak pelvis rotation speed, swing sequence, and common swing faults. Design: Cohort study, clinical measurement. Setting: English golf club. Participants: A total of 11 amateur golfers: 5 males (age: 37.2 [18.7] y, height: 184.4 [9.6] cm, body mass: 89.5 [13.4] kg, and handicap: 9 [6.6]) and 6 females (age: 53.7 [15.0] y, height: 166.8 [5.5] cm, body mass: 67.9 [16.6] kg, and handicap: 13 [6.1]). Main Outcome Measures: GSFMS composite and individual element scores and golf performance variables. Results: Significant relationships existed between GSFMS composite scores and handicap (r = −.779, P = .01); clubhead speed (r = .701, P = .02); ball speed (r = .674, P = .02); and peak pelvis rotation speed (r = .687, P = .02). Significant relationships existed between 90°/90° golf position and clubhead speed (r = .716, P = .01); ball speed (r = .777, P = .01); seated trunk rotation and peak pelvis rotation speed (r = .606, P = .048); single-leg balance and handicap (r = −.722, P = .01); torso rotation and handicap (r = −.637,P = .04); and torso rotation and peak pelvis rotation speed (r = .741, P = .01). Single-leg balance, overhead deep squat, and pelvic tilt were the GSFMS tests which participants had most difficulty in performing. The most common swing faults identified included loss of posture, slide, chicken winging, and early hip extension. Conclusions: The GSFMS may be used to identify movement limitations that relate to golfing performance. These findings may potentially allow intervention to correct movement patterns and potentially improve golf performance.

show abstract

Screening Tools as a Predictor of Injury in Dance: Systematic Literature Review and Meta-analysis

Cited by 36 publications

References 57 publications

Screening Tools as a Predictor of Injury in Gymnastics: Systematic Literature Review

Screening Tools as a Predictor of Injury in Gymnastics: Systematic Literature Review

Clinical Evaluation Techniques for Injury Risk Assessment in Elite Swimmers: A Systematic Review

The Relationship Between the Golf-Specific Movement Screen and Golf Performance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About