↓ Skip to main content

Movement Patterns and Muscular Function Before and After Onset of Sports-Related Groin Pain: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Sports Medicine, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
38 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
429 Mendeley
Title
Movement Patterns and Muscular Function Before and After Onset of Sports-Related Groin Pain: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis
Published in
Sports Medicine, May 2016
DOI 10.1007/s40279-016-0523-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paulina Kloskowska, Dylan Morrissey, Claire Small, Peter Malliaras, Christian Barton

Abstract

Sports-related groin pain (SRGP) is a common entity in rotational sports such as football, rugby and hockey, accounting for 12-18 % of injuries each year, with high recurrence rates and often prolonged time away from sport. This systematic review synthesises movement and muscle function findings to better understand deficits and guide rehabilitation. Prospective and retrospective cross-sectional studies investigating muscle strength, flexibility, cross-sectional area, electromyographic activation onset and magnitude in patients with SRGP were included. Four databases (MEDLINE, Web of Knowledge, EBSCOhost and EMBASE) were searched in June 2014. Studies were critiqued using a modified version of the Downs and Black Quality Index, and a meta-analysis was performed. Seventeen studies (14 high quality, 3 low quality; 8 prospective and 9 retrospective) were identified. Prospective findings: moderate evidence indicated decreased hip abduction flexibility as a risk factor for SRGP. Limited or very limited evidence suggested that decreased hip adduction strength during isokinetic testing at ~119°/s was a risk factor for SRGP, but no associations were found at ~30°/s or ~210°/s, or with peak torque angle. Decreased hip abductor strength in angular velocity in ~30°/s but not in ~119°/s and ~210°/s was found as a risk factor for SRGP. No relationships were found with hip internal or external rotation range of movement, nor isokinetic knee extension strength. Decreased isokinetic knee flexion strength also was a potential risk factor for SRGP, at a speed ~60°/s. Retrospective findings: there was strong evidence of decreased hip adductor muscle strength during a squeeze test at 45°, and decreased total hip external rotation range of movement (sum of both legs) being associated with SRGP. There was strong evidence of no relationship to abductor muscle strength nor unilateral hip internal and external rotation range of movement. Moderate evidence suggested that increased abduction flexibility and no change in total hip internal rotation range of movement (sum of both legs) were retrospectively associated with SRGP. Limited or very limited evidence (significant findings only) indicated decreased hip adductor muscle strength during 0° and 30° squeeze tests and during an eccentric hip adduction test, but a decrease in the isometric adductors-to-abductors strength ratio at speed 120°/s; decreased abductors-to-adductors activation ratio in the early phase in the moving leg as well as in all three phases in the weight-bearing leg during standing hip flexion; and increased hip flexors strength during isokinetic and decrease in transversus abdominis muscle resting thickness associated with SRGP. There were a number of significant movement and muscle function associations observed in athletes both prior to and following the onset of SRGP. The strength of findings was hampered by the lack of consistent terminology and diagnostic criteria, with there being clear guides for future research. Nonetheless, these findings should be considered in rehabilitation and prevention planning.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 38 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 429 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 424 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 85 20%
Student > Bachelor 68 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 41 10%
Student > Postgraduate 26 6%
Researcher 22 5%
Other 65 15%
Unknown 122 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 108 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 79 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 72 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 2%
Social Sciences 6 1%
Other 19 4%
Unknown 136 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 March 2022.
All research outputs
#1,398,554
of 25,260,058 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine
#1,133
of 2,902 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,032
of 305,136 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine
#20
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,260,058 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,902 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 55.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 305,136 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.