We have located links that may give you full text access.
Clinical Trial
Comparative Study
Controlled Clinical Trial
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Gender differences in lower extremity kinematics, kinetics and energy absorption during landing.
Clinical Biomechanics 2003 August
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether gender differences exist in lower extremity joint motions and energy absorption landing strategies between age and skill matched recreational athletes.
DESIGN: Mixed factor, repeated measures design.
BACKGROUND: Compared to males, females execute high demand activities in a more erect posture potentially predisposing the anterior cruciate ligament to greater loads and injury. The preferred energy absorption strategy may provide insight for this performance difference.
METHODS: Inverse dynamic solutions estimated lower extremity joint kinematics, kinetics and energetic profiles for twelve males and nine females performing a 60 cm drop landing.
RESULTS: Females demonstrated a more erect landing posture and utilized greater hip and ankle joint range of motions and maximum joint angular velocities compared to males. Females also exhibited greater energy absorption and peak powers from the knee extensors and ankle plantar-flexors compared to the males. Examinations of the energy absorption contributions revealed that the knee was the primary shock absorber for both genders, whereas the ankle plantar-flexors muscles was the second largest contributor to energy absorption for the females and the hip extensors muscles for the males.
CONCLUSIONS: Females may choose to land in a more erect posture to maximize the energy absorption from the joints most proximal to ground contact.
RELEVANCE: Females may be at a greater risk to anterior cruciate ligament injury during landing due to their energy absorption strategy.
DESIGN: Mixed factor, repeated measures design.
BACKGROUND: Compared to males, females execute high demand activities in a more erect posture potentially predisposing the anterior cruciate ligament to greater loads and injury. The preferred energy absorption strategy may provide insight for this performance difference.
METHODS: Inverse dynamic solutions estimated lower extremity joint kinematics, kinetics and energetic profiles for twelve males and nine females performing a 60 cm drop landing.
RESULTS: Females demonstrated a more erect landing posture and utilized greater hip and ankle joint range of motions and maximum joint angular velocities compared to males. Females also exhibited greater energy absorption and peak powers from the knee extensors and ankle plantar-flexors compared to the males. Examinations of the energy absorption contributions revealed that the knee was the primary shock absorber for both genders, whereas the ankle plantar-flexors muscles was the second largest contributor to energy absorption for the females and the hip extensors muscles for the males.
CONCLUSIONS: Females may choose to land in a more erect posture to maximize the energy absorption from the joints most proximal to ground contact.
RELEVANCE: Females may be at a greater risk to anterior cruciate ligament injury during landing due to their energy absorption strategy.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app