Preseason Physical Capacity For Play In NCAA Division II Women Athletes

Women collegiate athletes are at greater risk for non-contact injuries during competition and training than men, yet assessment during the preseason of physical capacity to begin the competitive sport season is lacking. PURPOSE: to assess lower-body muscular strength and power in women collegiate athletes during the preseason. METHODS: Women varsity athletes (n = 16; 21 ± 1 y; 68 ± 11 kg; 1.7 ± 0.1 m; sports: soccer, field hockey, basketball) were recruited. All athletes had a history of lower-body injury. Physical capacity for competition was assessed during the specific preseasons of the sports sampled using three tests. Multi-speed (60, 180, 300°s-1) isokinetic dynamometry determined bilateral peak torque (PT) and unilateral hamstring:quadriceps (H:Q) ratio during knee flexion and extension. Isometric mid-thigh pull (IMTP) assessed peak pull force (PPF) and max rate of force development (RFD). Drop jump from 30 cm determined bilateral and total peak landing force (PLF) and max RFD. Data were analyzed using paired t-test and ANOVA. Error rate was p ≤ .05. RESULTS: H:Q at each speed in each leg were all lower than the normative value. H:Q was significantly lower in the involved leg vs. uninvolved at 60°s-1 (49.8 ± 5.7 vs. 57.7 ± 13.6 %; p = 0.01) and at 300°s-1 (58.3 ± 6.9 vs. 63.2 ± 10.9 %; p = 0.04). There was no significant difference in H:Q between speeds in the involved leg (p > 0.05). Only the H:Q between the first two speeds in the uninvolved leg were significantly different (p = 0.002). PT on extension was significantly greater in the uninvolved leg at 60°s-1 vs. involved (1.92 ± 0.35 vs. 1.69 ± 0.41 ft-lb·kg-1; p < 0.001). IMTP and DJ RFD were 11,311 ± 3630 N and 76,411 ± 16567 N (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between right and left leg PLF (21.2 ± 5.5 vs. 21.8 ± 1.8 N·kg-1; p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Landing mechanics data demonstrated little bilateral asymmetry. However, isokinetic dynamometry on the knee joint with previously-injured athletes demonstrated that a quadriceps strength deficit still exists in the involved leg, especially at lower extension speeds. Further, the low H:Q ratio in both legs indicates strength deficit in the hamstrings regardless of injury. The data suggest that athletes modify their preseason strength training plan to include more hamstring strengthening.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
Published
2024-09-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1249/01.mss.0001054532.62374.4f
Primary Topic
Sports Performance and Training
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Preseason Physical Capacity For Play In NCAA Division II Women Athletes

William R. Lunn, Robert W. Gregory, Alessio Caradolfo, Robert S. Axtell
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
Sports Performance and Training
article

Preseason Physical Capacity For Play In NCAA Division II Women Athletes

William R. Lunn, Robert W. Gregory, Alessio Caradolfo, Robert S. Axtell
article en

Abstract

Women collegiate athletes are at greater risk for non-contact injuries during competition and training than men, yet assessment during the preseason of physical capacity to begin the competitive sport season is lacking. PURPOSE: to assess lower-body muscular strength and power in women collegiate athletes during the preseason. METHODS: Women varsity athletes (n = 16; 21 ± 1 y; 68 ± 11 kg; 1.7 ± 0.1 m; sports: soccer, field hockey, basketball) were recruited. All athletes had a history of lower-body injury. Physical capacity for competition was assessed during the specific preseasons of the sports sampled using three tests. Multi-speed (60, 180, 300°s-1) isokinetic dynamometry determined bilateral peak torque (PT) and unilateral hamstring:quadriceps (H:Q) ratio during knee flexion and extension. Isometric mid-thigh pull (IMTP) assessed peak pull force (PPF) and max rate of force development (RFD). Drop jump from 30 cm determined bilateral and total peak landing force (PLF) and max RFD. Data were analyzed using paired t-test and ANOVA. Error rate was p ≤ .05. RESULTS: H:Q at each speed in each leg were all lower than the normative value. H:Q was significantly lower in the involved leg vs. uninvolved at 60°s-1 (49.8 ± 5.7 vs. 57.7 ± 13.6 %; p = 0.01) and at 300°s-1 (58.3 ± 6.9 vs. 63.2 ± 10.9 %; p = 0.04). There was no significant difference in H:Q between speeds in the involved leg (p > 0.05). Only the H:Q between the first two speeds in the uninvolved leg were significantly different (p = 0.002). PT on extension was significantly greater in the uninvolved leg at 60°s-1 vs. involved (1.92 ± 0.35 vs. 1.69 ± 0.41 ft-lb·kg-1; p < 0.001). IMTP and DJ RFD were 11,311 ± 3630 N and 76,411 ± 16567 N (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between right and left leg PLF (21.2 ± 5.5 vs. 21.8 ± 1.8 N·kg-1; p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Landing mechanics data demonstrated little bilateral asymmetry. However, isokinetic dynamometry on the knee joint with previously-injured athletes demonstrated that a quadriceps strength deficit still exists in the involved leg, especially at lower extension speeds. Further, the low H:Q ratio in both legs indicates strength deficit in the hamstrings regardless of injury. The data suggest that athletes modify their preseason strength training plan to include more hamstring strengthening.

Medicine & Science in Sports & ExerciseVol. 56(10S)
Southern Connecticut State University (US)
Gender equality
Openalex Percentile: Top 79%
Sports Performance and Training
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.