Current warm-up practices before maximal sprinting in track-and-field (athletics).

BACKGROUND: Warm-up is commonly performed by track-and-field athletes before performing maximal sprinting activities. Whilst some warm-up strategies may enhance athletes' physical and mental readiness, less is known about the current athletes' behaviors and warm-up practices in track and field. Therefore, this study aimed to identify the warm-up practices in a population of athletes performing in sprinting disciplines. METHODS: A cross-sectional exploratory study was performed in which track-and-field athletes, performing in athletics at a competitive level in disciplines requiring maximal acceleration and sprinting were recruited. We collected, using an online survey, information about 1) "General and Anthropometric data;" 2) "Athletics training practices" questioning the level of practices and the training frequency; and 3) "Athletics warm-up practices before maximal sprinting" questioning warm-up structure, duration and specific content. RESULTS: A total of 114 athletes replied to the survey. They reported a mean weekly training duration of 10.5 (±4.0) hours and a pre-maximal sprint warm-up duration of 40.5 (±13.5) minutes. During warm-up, they were engaged in five principal activities: predominantly moderate jogging (95% participation, 8±3.3 minutes), succeeded by dynamic and/or ballistic stretching (78% participation, 9±4.3 minutes), followed by athletic drills (96% participation, 15±5.4 minutes), culminating in accelerations (100% participation) along with high-speed running (77% participation). Warm-up duration and composition differed across athletes' levels of practice and disciplines. CONCLUSIONS: Most of the participants' warm-up practices were typically structured in a three-phase manner, comprising jogging, stretching, and specific training (athletic drills and accelerations). Most athletes followed scientific-based warm-up recommendations there are some areas where the evidence is limited, and more research is needed to determine the optimal warm-up routine for athletes.

Reliability and validity of 2D-video analysis to objectively assess hamstring performance during the H-test.

The H-test is commonly used during return-to-sport decisions after hamstring muscle injury. The primary aim was to evaluate the reliability of two-dimensional (2D) video analysis for the H-Test. The second aim was to assess its validity compared to an electronic gyroscope (gold standard), and the third aim was to establish normative values. We conducted a cross-sectional study including 30 healthy individuals. Mean, maximal velocities (VMean and Vmax) and range of motion (ROM) of hip flexion were captured during the H-test to evaluate inter-rater and test-retest reliability using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC2,1) and standard error of measurement (SEM). Correlation analysis (r) and as typical error of estimate (TEE) were used to assess the validity between the video and the gyroscope. Reliability was excellent for ROM (ICC:0.91, [95% CI:0.83-0.95]), moderate for VMean (ICC:0.57; [95% CI:0.32-0.74]) and VMax (ICC:0.64, [95% CI:0.43-0.79]). Strong positive correlations were found between video and gyroscope for VMean (r = 0.79, [95% CI:0.71-0.86]) and VMax (r = 0.84, [95% CI:0.77-0.89]) and very strong for ROM (r = 0.89, [95% CI:0.85-0.93]). Males exhibited a higher VMax (p < 0.001) than females, while females had a higher ROM (p < 0.001). 2D-video analysis is a valid and reliable method to assess ROM during the H-Test and could easily be implemented in clinical practice.

Hamstring Muscle Injuries and Hamstring Specific Training in Elite Athletics (Track and Field) Athletes.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to describe hamstring muscle injury (HMI) history and hamstring specific training (HST) in elite athletes. A secondary aim was to analyse the potential factors associated with in-championships HMI. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study to collect data before and during the 2018 European Athletics Championships. Injury and illness complaints during the month before the championship, HMI history during the entire career and the 2017-18 season, HST (strengthening, stretching, core stability, sprinting), and in-championship HMI were recorded. We calculated proportions of athletes with HMI history, we compared HST according to sex and disciplines with Chi2 tests or ANOVA, and analysed factors associated with in-championship HMI using simple model logistic regression. RESULTS: Among the 357 included athletes, 48% reported at least one HMI during their career and 24% during the 2017-18 season. Of this latter group, 30.6% reported reduced or no participation in athletics' training or competition at the start of the championship due to the hamstring injury. For HST, higher volumes of hamstring stretching and sprinting were reported for disciplines requiring higher running velocities (i.e., sprints, hurdles, jumps, combined events and middle distances). Five in-championship HMIs were recorded. The simple model analysis showed a lower risk of sustaining an in-championships HMI for athletes who performed more core (lumbo-pelvic) stability training (OR = 0.49 (95% CI: 0.25 to 0.89), p = 0.021). CONCLUSIONS: Our present study reports that HMI is a characteristic of the athletics athletes' career, especially in disciplines involving sprinting. In these disciplines, athletes were performing higher volumes of hamstring stretching and sprinting than in other disciplines. Further studies should be conducted to better understand if and how HST are protective approaches for HMI in order to improve HMI risk reduction strategies.

Sprint Specificity of Isolated Hamstring-Strengthening Exercises in Terms of Muscle Activity and Force Production.

To train hamstring muscle specifically to sprint, strengthening programs should target exercises associated with horizontal force production and high levels of hamstring activity. Therefore, the objectives of this study were to analyze the correlation between force production capacities during sprinting and hamstring strengthening exercises, and to compare hamstring muscle activity during sprinting and these exercises. Fourteen track and field regional level athletes performed two maximal 50-m sprints and six strengthening exercises: Nordic hamstring exercises without and with hip flexion, Upright-hip-extension in isometric and concentric modalities, Standing kick, and Slide-leg-bridge. The sprinting horizontal force production capacity at low (F0) and high (V0) speeds was computed from running velocity data. Hamstring muscle performances were assessed directly or indirectly during isolated exercises. Hamstring muscle electromyographic activity was recorded during all tasks. Our results demonstrate substantially large to very large correlations between V0 and performances in the Upright-hip-extension in isometric (rs = 0.56; p = 0.040), Nordic hamstring exercise without hip flexion (rs = 0.66; p = 0.012) and with 90° hip flexion (rs = 0.73; p = 0.003), and between F0 and Upright-hip-extension in isometric (rs = 0.60; p = 0.028) and the Nordic hamstring exercise without hip flexion (rs = 0.59; p = 0.030). However, none of the test exercises activated hamstring muscles more than an average of 60% of the maximal activation during top-speed sprinting. In conclusion, training programs aiming to be sprint-specific in terms of horizontal force production could include exercises such as the Upright-hip-extension and the Nordic hamstring exercise, in addition to maximal sprinting activity, which is the only exercise leading to high levels of hamstring muscle activity.