Why the study?
Hamstring injuries are endemic, but the influences of test-specific training and different test methods on decision-making remain elusive.
Does isokinetic or Nordic hamstring exercise improve hamstring strength and muscle architecture in sport-students?
Does isokinetic or Nordic hamstring exercise improve hamstring strength and muscle architecture in sport-students?
Hamstring training shows high specificity, and adaptations may be undetected by conventional test devices due to low sensitivity.
Test-specific eccentric training boosts hamstring strength more on matched devices; leaves open whether conventional tests reliably detect adaptations or link to architecture changes.
Hamstring injuries are endemic, but influences of test-specific training and the application of different test methods on decision making remain elusive. Sport-students were randomised to isokinetic (IG) or Nordic hamstring (NG) exercise or a control group (CG) for six weeks. Training and testing procedures were matched to biomechanical parameters. Hamstring strength (EPT), work, muscle soreness (visual analogue scale (VAS)), biceps femoris (BF lh ) muscle size and architecture were assessed. Anthropometrics and strength parameters did not differ at baseline. Yet, body mass normalised EPT, and work revealed a significant group × time × device effect, with a significant main effect for devices. Experimental conditions triggered meaningful increases in EPT compared to the control group, but the effects were higher when recorded on the training device. Despite significant group × time interactions, normalised average work on the NHD was only higher in the NG compared to CG of the left leg (+ 35%). No effects were found for BF lh parameters. Hamstrings showed a high training specificity, but adaptations likely remain undetected owing to the low sensitivity of conventional test devices. Moreover, strength increase of ~ 15% does not necessarily have to be reflected in BF lh parameters.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wiesinger et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: