This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
Clinical implications: The test requires stability in the sagittal plan during a symmetric upper ex- tremity movement. Many functional activities in sport require trunk stabilizers to transfer forces sym- metrically from the upper extremities to the lower extremities. Movement such as sprinting, rebound- ing in basketball, blocking in volleyball are typical examples of energy transfer. If the trunk does not have adequate stability during active kinetic motion, energy will be dispersed, leading to poor per- formance or increase of potential micro traumatic injury. When the athlete scores less than 3, the limiting factor must be identified. If the athlete experiences pain in the lumbar region during the mo- tion, a 0 is given and a thorough evaluation should be performed.


Rotational Stability


Grade 1


Grade 2


Grade 3


Purpose: The Rotational Stability test is used to assess multi-planar stability while a combined up- per and lower extremity motion is performed. Description: The individual assumes the starting position in the quadruped with their shoulder and hips at 90 degrees relative to the upper torso. The knee is position at 90 degrees with the ankle be- ing dorsi-flexed. The 2” x 6” is placed between the knees and hands so that they are in contact with the board. The athlete flexes the shoulder and extends the same side hip and knee with approxi- mately 6inches clearance from the floor. The elbow, hand, and knee that are lifted should all remain in line with the 2” x 6”. The torso should remain in the same plane as the 2” x 6” while the shoulder and knee are flexed enough for the elbow and knee to touch. This is performed bilaterally for up 3 attempts. Clinical implications: The ability to perform the Rotational Stability test requires asymmetric trunk


stability in the transverse and sagittal planes during asymmetric upper and lower extremity move- ment. Many functional sports require the trunk to transfer force asymmetrically from the lower ex- tremities and vice versa. Running and acceleration on the track or football pitch for example are typi- cal for this type of energy transfer. Inadequate trunk stability during kinetic energy will be dispersed leading to poor performance as well as an increase of potential traumatic injury. Poor performance in this test will attribute to poor asymmetric stabilizers. When an athlete achieves a score less than 3, the limiting factor must be identified.


FMS and Long Term Athletics Development The Long Term Athlete Development programme ((LTAD) is based on designing a structured and progressive periodised planning focused on long term participation (Bayli, 1991). The LTAD model is one of a number of approaches that focuses on key common principles of individual development, which has helped sports organisations to consider good practice for long term participation of young athletes (Stafford, 2005). . The LTAD is about building physical competency within the athletes often given the rationale and structure, but do not give a framework for coaches to use in order to develop their own session content and plans depending on the makeup of the group. Athletes often utilise compensatory movement strategies to achieve high performance, these compensatory movements can lead to poor biomechanics and in most cases results in injuries (Cook, 2001). The concept of coaches emulating and applying advanced training programmes or exercises and incorrectly applying them to young athletes’ population without building a solid foundation for Long


48


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86