Stance limb kinetics of older male athletes endurance running performance

Abstract

1The aim of this study was to examine the age-based, lower limb kinetics of running 2 performances of endurance athletes. Six running trials were performed by 24 male 3 athletes, who were distinguished by three age groupings (S35: 26 -32 years, M50: 50 -54 4 years, M60 +: 60 -68 years). Lower limb coordinate and ground reaction force data were 5 collected using a nine camera infra-red system synchronised with a force plate. A slower 6anteroposterior (M ± SD S35 = 4.13 ± 0.54 m/s: M60 + = 3.34 ± 0.40 m/s, p < 0.05) 7 running velocity was associated with significant (p < 0.05) decreases in step length and 8 discrete vertical ground contact force between M60 + and S35 athletes. The M60 + 9 athletes simultaneously generated a 32% and 42% reduced (p < 0.05) ankle joint moment 10 when compared to the M50 and S35 athletes and 72% (p < 0.05) reduction in knee joint 11 stiffness when compared to S35 athletes. Age-based declines in running performance were 12 associated with reduced stance phase force tolerance and generation that may be 13 accounted for due to an inhibited force-velocity muscular function of the lower limb. 14 Joint-specific coaching strategies customised to athlete age are warranted to 15 maintain/enhance athletes' dynamic performance. 16Word Count: 200 words 17

Quantifying demands on the hamstrings during high‐speed running: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

“…Primary joint kinetic data (detailed in Appendix S5) were extracted for knee flexion (internal moment: n = 44, 23,35,49,54,60,62,69,70,73,76,77,79–110 power: n = 16, 18,50,71,79–82,84,95,99,102,103,107,108,111,112 work: n = 2 102,109 ); and for hip extension (internal moment: n = 47, 18,23,33,35,37,47–49,54,62,73–77,80,82,83,85–93,95,96,98,99,102–111,113–119 power: n = 12, 33,71,82,95,99,102,103,107,108,111,112,116 work: n = 2 102,109 and impulse: n = 1 48 ). Meta‐analysis of sagittal plane kinetics was performed with eligible studies for knee flexion internal moment: fast (*swing phase only) (Figure 3, n = 5, pooled mean: 2.2 Nm/kg, 95% CI: 1.9–2.5), slow (Figure 4, n = 4, pooled mean: 0.9 Nm/kg, 95% CI: 0.4–1.4); for knee flexion power: fast (*swing phase only) (Figure 5, n = 5, pooled mean: 40.3 W/kg, 95% CI: 31.4–49.2); for hip extension internal moment: fast (*swing phase only) (Figure 6, n = 4, pooled mean: 4.8 Nm/kg, 95% CI: 3.9–5.6), slow (Figure 7, n = 7, pooled mean: 2.3 Nm/kg, 95% CI: 1.9–2.7); and for hip extension power: fast (*swing phase only) (Figure 8, n = 3, pooled mean: 33.1 W/kg, 95%...…”