Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
JAMAarrow_drop_down
JAMA
Article . 1975 . Peer-reviewed
Data sources: Crossref
JAMA
Article . 1976
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

Knee Stability and Knee Ligament Injuries

Authors: Alexander Kalenak; Chauncey A. Morehouse;

Knee Stability and Knee Ligament Injuries

Abstract

Controversy exists on the relationship of knee ligament stability to knee injuries. Subjective evaluation of joint tightness or looseness has been proposed as a criterion for prescribing selective corrective strengthening or stretching exercises. Biomechanical studies of knee ligament stability were performed on 401 college football players from 1969 to 1971. Forty-three knee ligament injuries occurred during this period of time, 19 (44.2%) in "loose-jointed" players and 24 (55.8%) in "tight-jointed" players. Joint laxity tests were performed on 72 college football players; the distribution of college football players failing to perform each of the tests was quite different from that reported for professional football players. There was no relationship between the subjective joint laxity tests and the objective biomechanical tests of knee ligament stability. We conclude that it is not possible to predict knee injuries by subjective evaluations of joint laxity or by objective biomechanical knee ligament evaluations and that exercise programs based on subjective studies are therefore not sound.

Keywords

Male, Rupture, Gymnastics, Knee Joint, Football, Knee Injuries, Biomechanical Phenomena, Athletic Injuries, Ligaments, Articular, Sprains and Strains, Humans

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    citations
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    66
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 1%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
citations
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
66
Top 10%
Top 1%
Average
Upload OA version
Are you the author? Do you have the OA version of this publication?