Comparison of maximum joint angles during pole vaulting between male pole vaulters with and without lumbar disc degeneration or lumbar spondylolysis.

BACKGROUND: Pole vaulting involves trunk flexion, extension, and rotation, which may place the lumbar spine under stress. Repeated pole vaulting may cause lumbar disc degeneration (DD) and lumbar spondylolysis (LS); however, this phenomenon is yet to be established. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the difference in the maximum joint angles of the shoulder, hip, and trunk during pole vaulting between male pole vaulters with and without lumbar DD or LS. METHODS: This retrospective study included 17 male pole vaulters. Four high-speed cameras were used to record the pole vaulters at 240 Hz. Radiography and magnetic resonance imaging were used to examine the lumbar spine in all athletes. Differences in the data between two sets of groups were analyzed using the unpaired t-test or the Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS: There was a significant difference in the maximum joint angle of hip flexion between pole vaulters with and without lumbar DD (p= 0.03). CONCLUSION: Pole vaulters with lumbar DD may use lumbar flexion instead of hip flexion during the rock-back movement. Moreover, LS may occur due to repeated failed vaulting. Therefore, trunk stability and functional movements should be prioritized to prevent organic changes in the lower back.

The prevalence of spondylolysis and intervertebral disc degeneration in male pole vaulters.

BACKGROUND: The lower back is the most common injury location in pole vaulters, but the prevalence of lumbar spondylolysis and intervertebral disc degeneration is not known. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the prevalence of lumbar spondylolysis and intervertebral disc degeneration in pole vaulters. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted in the Tokai area of Japan and included 21 pole vaulters (mean ± standard deviation [range]: age, 22.2 ± 3.2 [18-28] years; height, 172.2 ± 4.7 [165.0-182.0] cm; body weight, 67.6 ± 7.3 [54.0- 80.0] kg). The majority of pole vaulters were collegiate athletes. We performed anterior, lateral, and oblique radiography at 45∘ and magnetic resonance imaging in the sagittal and coronal planes of the lumbar spine. The evaluation was performed independently of whether the athletes had lower back pain (LBP). Moreover, we investigated the duration of pole-vaulting experience and history and current presence of LBP using a questionnaire. RESULTS: The prevalence of lumbar spondylolysis and intervertebral disc degeneration was 28.6% (6/21) and 38.1% (8/21), respectively. Herniation was found in six discs in four vaulters (19.0%). All athletes had a history of LBP. The prevalence of lumbar spondylolysis was high (28.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Sport-specific movements performed by pole vaulters may be a risk factor for lumbar spondylolysis.

Internal Risk Factors for Low Back Pain in Pole Vaulters and Decathletes: A Prospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Pole vaulters and decathletes frequently experience several types of injuries to their lower back, often resulting in mechanical low back pain (LBP). However, the risk factors for the occurrence of LBP in these athletes have not been defined. PURPOSE: To determine the physical factors that relate to LBP occurrence for collegiate pole vaulters and decathletes. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: We observed 31 pole vaulters and decathletes for 1 year. At the start of the observation period, isokinetic flexion and extension muscle strength of the knee and hip joints were recorded along with active and passive range of motion (ROM) and muscle tightness. Participants were then divided into 2 groups using the median value of each measurement: those below the median (low group) and those above the median (high group). The log-rank test was used to compare LBP occurrence between the low group and high group for all measurements. Multivariate regression analyses were thereafter applied using the Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS: Log-rank tests revealed a statistically significant change in the survival curve for the occurrence of LBP in the participants with chronic LBP (P = .037), the low group for hip flexion peak torque per body weight on the non-takeoff leg (P = .047), and the low group for passive hip flexion angle on both legs (takeoff leg: P = .034; non-takeoff leg: P = .023). In addition, log-rank tests revealed a statistically significant change in the survival curve for the occurrence of LBP in the low group for passive hip extension angle on the takeoff leg only for the participants without chronic LBP (P = .014). CONCLUSION: It may be necessary to acquire sufficient ROM and hip flexion to prevent LBP occurrence in pole vaulters and decathletes.

Injuries in Collegiate Track and Field Jumping: A 2-Year Prospective Surveillance Study.

BACKGROUND: Athletes participating in track and field jumping events (long jump, triple jump, high jump, and pole vault) are exposed to ground-reaction forces on the takeoff leg that are several times their body weight. This can cause injuries specific to such activities. PURPOSE: To determine the incidence of injuries in collegiate jumpers using the guidelines set forth by a 2014 consensus statement on injury surveillance during track and field events. STUDY DESIGN: Descriptive epidemiology study. METHODS: A total of 51 jumpers between April 2016 and March 2017 and 54 jumpers between April 2017 and March 2018 participated in this study. All athletes were from a single college in Japan. Baseline information on athletes participating in the long jump, triple jump, high jump, and pole vault was collected at study enrollment. Practice and competition exposures were reported by the team trainer. Injury incidence was calculated as the number of injuries per 1000 athlete-exposures (AEs). RESULTS: A total of 147 injuries were reported among 16,998 exposures (8.65 injuries per 1000 AEs). The most common injury locations were the posterior thigh and lateral ankle (17.0%), followed by the posterior foot or toe (12.9%); the most frequent type of injury was strain/muscle rupture/tear (21.1%). The most common injury for long jumpers was ankle sprain (23.3%); for high jumpers, flexor hallucis longus tendinosis (15.8%); and for pole vaulters, hamstring strain (13.2%). CONCLUSION: The overall characteristics are different for each event; therefore, injuries for each event need to be investigated.

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CHRONIC LOW BACK PAIN AND PHYSICAL FACTORS IN COLLEGIATE POLE VAULTERS: A CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY.

BACKGROUND: The low back is the most common injury location in pole vaulters, and low back pain (LBP) can easily become chronic. Therefore, knowing the physical characteristics of athletes experiencing repeated LBP may be beneficial for recovery and injury prevention. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to describe and analyze the physical characteristics of pole vaulters with chronic LBP. STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional study. METHODS: Twenty male pole vaulters participated in this study. A questionnaire was used to garner descriptive and personal data, including personal best performance in the pole vault. Additionally, the following physical characteristics were measured: 1) isokinetic muscle strength of hip and knee flexors and extensors, 2) active/passive range of motion and muscle flexibility in multiple joints and regions, 3) performance on the Functional Movement Screen™ (FMS™) and 4) spinal column alignment. Subjects were categorized using the questionnaire and divided into two groups, one with and one without chronic LBP. RESULTS: The personal best performance and angle on the active straight leg raise test (SLR) were significantly lower and smaller, respectively, in the chronic LBP group than in the non-chronic LBP group. Additionally, the difference between the passive SLR angle and active SLR angle (ΔSLR) was significantly larger in the chronic LBP group than in the non-chronic LBP group. Those with chronic LBP had were more likely to have a FMS™ composite score ≤14. CONCLUSION: The active SLR angle and ΔSLR were significantly smaller and larger, respectively, in the chronic LBP group than in the non-chronic LBP group. This may be because of the poor stability of trunk or incompetence of the kinetic chain required for raising the lower limbs. The chronic LBP group had a significantly higher probability of having an FMS™ composite score of ≤14. it may be important to examine the active straight leg raise (vs. passive only), and fundamental movements as screened by the FMS ™ in pole vaulters. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2b.

The Risk Factors of Hamstring Strain Injury Induced by High-Speed Running.

Hamstring strain injury is a multifactorial and complex problem involving interactions among various factors. Information about risk factors for this injury is inconsistent among studies because the strong effects of confounding factors and injury situations are often ignored. We investigated the relationship between hamstring strain induced by high-speed running and intrinsic risk factors, including hip muscle morphology and function, by excluding the influences of confounding factors. Sixty-one male track and field athletes (age, 19.6 ± 1.1 years; 95% confidence interval, 19.3-19.9) who often performed high-speed running were monitored throughout one season. Before the season, we measured hip and knee strength, muscle thickness of the gluteus maximus and biceps femoris, and hip and knee joint range of motion (ROM). We also obtained information about each athlete's history of hamstring injury by questionnaire. Eighteen athletes sustained hamstring strain injuries induced by high-speed running. Eighteen uninjured athletes who had the same profile of confounding factors as the injured athletes were selected as controls. Previously injured athletes had a significantly higher injury rate than uninjured athletes (p < .05; odds ratio, 2.85). No other measurements had a significant relationship with the occurrence of injury. However, passive hip ROM (flexion and extension) tended to be larger in the injured than control group. A history of hamstring strain was a strong risk factor for hamstring strain injury, and it may affect other factors. Therefore, the risk factors for hamstring strain injury should be investigated by eliminating the impact of a history of hamstring strain.