Wed, Oct 2, 2024
Volume 14, Issue 4 (Autumn-In Press 2024)
PTJ 2024, 14(4): 0-0 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Asadpour R, Norasteh A A. Comparison of the Dominant and Non-Dominant Foot Angle and the Knee Valgus Pattern in Basketball Players with Dynamic Knee Valgus After Fatigue. PTJ 2024; 14 (4)
URL: http://ptj.uswr.ac.ir/article-1-633-en.html
URL: http://ptj.uswr.ac.ir/article-1-633-en.html
1- University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran.
Abstract: (271 Views)
Purpose: Since the foot is so important for maintaining stability and posture, knowing the difference between dominant and non-dominant knees can help reduce the risk of knee injury. Basketball players with dynamic knee valgus following fatigue application were the subjects of the current study, which compared the angle and pattern of knee valgus in dominant and non-dominant feet.
Methods: In this cross-sectional study, our selection process involved choosing 27 basketball players with a knee dynamic valgus pattern (mean age= 20.77±3.06 years, mean height=188±9 centimeters, and mean weight= 79.68±18.35 kilograms) in a non-random, targeted manner. To assess the knee valgus angle in the frontal plane, we performed imaging using a digital camera positioned at a distance of 366 centimeters and a height of 105 centimeters relative to the subject. Furthermore, the subjects performed three countermovement jumps. We conducted data analysis using “KINOVEA” software. In this study, players engaged in a 40-minute basketball game, conducted under regulations and including all scheduled rest periods.
Results: There was no significant difference between the pre-test and post-test in the dominant foot initial contact valgus variable (p=0.900), non-dominant foot initial contact valgus variable (p=0.134), dominant foot maximum flexion valgus variable (p=0.237), and non-dominant foot maximum flexion valgus variable (p=0.188), according to the results of the paired t-test for within-group comparison of the study's mean variables. Furthermore, there was no statistically significant difference in the first contact valgus between the dominant and non-dominant foot prior to the test (p=0.485) or between the two groups after the test (p=0.066). However, a significant difference was found in the maximum flexion valgus between the dominant and non-dominant foot before the test (p=0.012) and after the test (p=0.018), indicating that the dominant foot had a greater valgus angle than the non-dominant foot in both instances.
Conclusion: The current study's findings indicate that functional exhaustion, as employed in this investigation, does not raise the knee valgus angle; however, among basketball players, the dominant foot's valgus angle was larger than the non-dominant foot's. Basketball players' dominant foot is therefore probably more vulnerable to non-contact anterior cruciate ligament injuries.
Methods: In this cross-sectional study, our selection process involved choosing 27 basketball players with a knee dynamic valgus pattern (mean age= 20.77±3.06 years, mean height=188±9 centimeters, and mean weight= 79.68±18.35 kilograms) in a non-random, targeted manner. To assess the knee valgus angle in the frontal plane, we performed imaging using a digital camera positioned at a distance of 366 centimeters and a height of 105 centimeters relative to the subject. Furthermore, the subjects performed three countermovement jumps. We conducted data analysis using “KINOVEA” software. In this study, players engaged in a 40-minute basketball game, conducted under regulations and including all scheduled rest periods.
Results: There was no significant difference between the pre-test and post-test in the dominant foot initial contact valgus variable (p=0.900), non-dominant foot initial contact valgus variable (p=0.134), dominant foot maximum flexion valgus variable (p=0.237), and non-dominant foot maximum flexion valgus variable (p=0.188), according to the results of the paired t-test for within-group comparison of the study's mean variables. Furthermore, there was no statistically significant difference in the first contact valgus between the dominant and non-dominant foot prior to the test (p=0.485) or between the two groups after the test (p=0.066). However, a significant difference was found in the maximum flexion valgus between the dominant and non-dominant foot before the test (p=0.012) and after the test (p=0.018), indicating that the dominant foot had a greater valgus angle than the non-dominant foot in both instances.
Conclusion: The current study's findings indicate that functional exhaustion, as employed in this investigation, does not raise the knee valgus angle; however, among basketball players, the dominant foot's valgus angle was larger than the non-dominant foot's. Basketball players' dominant foot is therefore probably more vulnerable to non-contact anterior cruciate ligament injuries.
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
General
Received: 2024/03/11 | Accepted: 2024/07/21 | Published: 2024/10/1
Received: 2024/03/11 | Accepted: 2024/07/21 | Published: 2024/10/1
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-By-NC), which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
Contact Information
