El discurso del buen pastor en Juan 10

There is no doubt about the importance one should give to the words of the Good Shepherd in John 10. Nevertheless, very few studies have dealt with the dynamics of the narrative, its inner structure and, especially, with its relationship within the context of the fourth Gospel. We know even less about the links of this text with others in the Old Testament, what is said in the Jewish Tradition and other writings between the two Testaments. Needless to say that a close study of these sources will give an exegetical and hermeneutical focus and a new perspective to these words of Jesus. This could also be achieved without overlooking different studies and interpretations of these verses given by worlwide known exegetes.Nadie duda de la importancia del discurso del Buen Pastor en Juan 10. Sin embargo, pocos estudios logran precisar la dinámica del relato, su estructura interna y sobre todo la relación con el entorno del cuarto Evangelio. Menos aún, se conoce la relación del texto con pasajes del Antiguo Testamento, con la tradición judía y la literatura intertestamentaria. El acercamiento a estas fuentes diversas permite encuadrar con perspectiva exegética y hermenéutica esta alocución de Jesús, incluso realizando un balance de las distintas presentaciones e interpretaciones de la perícopa, en autores de reconocida trayectoria mundial en el ámbito de la exégesis

Biomechanical risk factors for lower extremity stress fracture

Objectives: Stress fracture injuries disproportionately affect athletes and military service members and little is known about the modifiable biomechanical risk factors associated with these injuries. The purpose of this study was to prospectively examine the association between neuromuscular and biomechanical factors upon entry to military service and the subsequent incidence of lower-extremity stress fracture injury during four years of follow-up. Methods: We analyzed data from the JUMP-ACL cohort, an existing prospective cohort study of military cadets. JUMP-ACL conducted detailed motion analysis during a jump landing task at the initiation of each subject’s military career. We limited our analyses to the class years 2009-2013 (i.e., subjects who completed baseline testing in 2005-2008). There were 1895 subjects available for analysis. Fifty-two subjects reported a history of stress fracture at baseline and were excluded from further analysis leaving 1843 subjects. Incident lower extremity-stress fracture cases were identified through the Defense Medical Surveillance System and the Cadet Injury and Illness Tracking System during the follow-up period. The electronic medical records of each potential incident case were reviewed and each case was confirmed by an adjudication committee consisting of two sports medicine fellowship trained orthopaedic surgeons. The primary outcome of interest was the incidence rate of lower-extremity stress fracture during the follow-up period. The association between incident stress fracture and sagittal, frontal, and transverse plane hip and knee kinematics during the jump-landing task were examined at initial contact (IC), 15%(T15), 50%(T50), 85%(T85) and 100%(T100) of stance phase. Descriptive plots of all biomechanical variables along with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were generated during the stance phase of the jump landing task. Univariate and multivariable Poisson regression models were used to estimate the association between baseline biomechanical factors and the incidence rate of lower-extremity stress fracture during follow-up. Results: Overall, 94 (5.1%, 95%CI: 4.14, 6.21) subjects sustained an incident stress fracture during the follow-up period. The incidence rate for stress fracture injuries among females was nearly three times greater when compared to males (IRR=2.86, 95%CI: 1.88, 4.34, p<0.001). Compared to those with greater than 5° of knee valgus, subjects with neutral or varus knee alignment experienced incidence rates for stress fracture that were 43%-53% lower at IC (IRR=0.57, 95%CI: 0.29, 1.11, p=0.10), T50 (IRR=0.47, 95%CI=0.23, 1.00, p=0.05), and T85 (IRR=0.53, 95%CI: 0.29, 0.98, p=0.04). Subjects with greater than 5° of internal knee rotation exhibited rates for stress fracture that were 2-4 times higher at T15 (IRR=2.31, 95%CI: 1.01, 5.27, p=0.05), T50 (IRR=3.98, 95%CI: 0.99, 16.00, p=0.05), and T85 (IRR=2.31, 95%CI: 0.86, 6.23, p=0.10), when compared to those with neutral or external knee rotation alignment. Conclusion: Several potentially modifiable biomechanical factors at the time of entry into military service appear to be associated with the subsequent rate of stress fracture. It is possible that injury prevention programs targeted to address these biomechanical movement patterns may reduce the risk of stress fracture injury in athletes and military service members

Tidal friction in close-in satellites and exoplanets. The Darwin theory re-visited

This report is a review of Darwin's classical theory of bodily tides in which we present the analytical expressions for the orbital and rotational evolution of the bodies and for the energy dissipation rates due to their tidal interaction. General formulas are given which do not depend on any assumption linking the tidal lags to the frequencies of the corresponding tidal waves (except that equal frequency harmonics are assumed to span equal lags). Emphasis is given to the cases of companions having reached one of the two possible final states: (1) the super-synchronous stationary rotation resulting from the vanishing of the average tidal torque; (2) the capture into a 1:1 spin-orbit resonance (true synchronization). In these cases, the energy dissipation is controlled by the tidal harmonic with period equal to the orbital period (instead of the semi-diurnal tide) and the singularity due to the vanishing of the geometric phase lag does not exist. It is also shown that the true synchronization with non-zero eccentricity is only possible if an extra torque exists opposite to the tidal torque. The theory is developed assuming that this additional torque is produced by an equatorial permanent asymmetry in the companion. The results are model-dependent and the theory is developed only to the second degree in eccentricity and inclination (obliquity). It can easily be extended to higher orders, but formal accuracy will not be a real improvement as long as the physics of the processes leading to tidal lags is not better known.Comment: 30 pages, 7 figures, corrected typo

The Effects of an Injury Prevention Program on Landing Biomechanics over Time

Background: Knowledge is limited regarding how long improvements in biomechanics remain after completion of a lower extremity injury prevention program. Purpose: To evaluate the effects of an injury prevention program on movement technique and peak vertical ground-reaction forces (VGRF) over time compared with a standard warm-up (SWU) program. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: A total of 1104 incoming freshmen (age range, 17-22 years) at a military academy in the United States volunteered to participate. Participants were cluster-randomized by military company to either the Dynamic Integrated Movement Enhancement (DIME) injury prevention program or SWU. A random subsample of participants completed a standardized jump-landing task at each time point: immediately before the intervention (PRE), immediately after (POST), and 2 (POST2M), 4 (POST4M), 6 (POST6M), and 8 months (POST8M) after the intervention. VGRF data collected during the jump-landing task were normalized to body weight (%BW). The Landing Error Scoring System (LESS) was used to evaluate movement technique during the jump landing. The change scores (δ) for each variable (LESS, VGRF) between the group's average value at PRE and each time point were calculated. Separate univariate analyses of variance were performed to evaluate group differences. Results: The results showed a greater decrease in mean (±SD) VGRF in the DIME group compared with the SWU group at all retention time points: POST2M (SWU [δ%BW], -0.13 ± 0.82; DIME, -0.62 ± 0.91; P =.001), POST4M (SWU, -0.15 ± 0.98; DIME,-0.46 ± 0.64; P =.04), POST6M (SWU, -0.04 ± 0.96; DIME, -0.53 ± 0.83; P =.004), and POST8M (SWU, 0.38 ± 0.95; DIME, -0.11 ± 0.98; P =.003), but there was not a significant improvement in the DIME group between PRE and POST8M (δ%BW, -0.11 ± 0.98). No group differences in δ LESS were observed. Conclusion: The study findings demonstrated that an injury prevention program performed as a warm-up can reduce vertical ground-reaction forces compared with a standard warm-up but a maintenance program is likely necessary in order for continued benefit. Clinical Relevance: Injury prevention programs may need to be performed constantly, or at least every sport season, in order for participants to maintain the protective effects against injury

Landing Error Scoring System (LESS) Items are Associated with the Incidence Rate of Lower Extremity Stress Fracture

Objectives: Lower-extremity stress fracture injuries are a major cause of morbidity in physically active populations. The ability to efficiently screen for modifiable risk factors associated with injury is critical in developing and implementing effective injury prevention programs. The purpose of this study was to determine if baseline Landing Error Scoring System (LESS) scores were associated with the incidence rate of lower-extremity stress fracture during four years of follow-up. Methods: To accomplish this objective we conducted a prospective cohort study at a US Service Academy. A total of 1772 eligible subjects with complete baseline data and no history of lower-extremity stress fracture were included in this study. At baseline we conducted motion analysis during a jump landing task using the LESS. Incident lower-extremity stress fracture cases were identified during the four year follow-up period using the injury surveillance systems at our institution. The primary outcome of interest was the incidence rate of lower-extremity stress fracture during follow-up. The electronic medical records of each potential incident case were reviewed and case status was determined by an adjudication committee consisting of two sports medicine fellowship-trained orthopaedic surgeons who were blinded to baseline LESS data. The association between baseline LESS scores and the incidence rate of lower-extremity stress fracture was examined for total LESS score and for each individual LESS item. Univariate and multivariable Poisson regression models were used to estimate the association between baseline LESS scores and the incidence rate of lower-extremity stress fracture during follow-up. Results: During the follow-up period, 94 incident lower-extremity stress fractures were documented in the study cohort and the cumulative incidence of stress fracture was 5.3% (95%CI: 4.3%, 6.5%). In univariate analyses total LESS score at baseline was associated with the incidence rate of lower-extremity stress fracture during follow-up. For every additional movement error documented at baseline there was a 15% increase in the incidence rate of lower-extremity stress fracture during follow-up (IRR=1.15; 95%CI: 1.02, 1.31, p=0.025). Based on univariate analyses, several individual LESS items at baseline were also associated with the incidence rate of stress fracture during follow-up. Ankle flexion at initial contact (p=0.055), stance width at initial contact (p=0.026), asymmetrical landing at initial contact (p=0.003), trunk flexion at initial contact (p=0.036), and overall impression (p=0.021) were significantly associated with the incidence rate of stress fracture. In multivariable analyses controlling for sex and year of entry into the cohort, subjects who consistently landed flat-footed or heel-to-toe were 2.33 times (IRR=2.33; 95%CI: 1.36, 3.97, p=0.002) more likely to sustain a lower-extremity stress fracture during follow-up. Similarly, subjects who consistently demonstrated asymmetric landing at initial contact were 2.53 times (IRR=2.53; 95%CI: 1.34, 4.74, p=0.004) more likely to sustain a stress fracture during follow-up. Conclusion: These data suggest that specific LESS items may be predictive of lower-extremity stress fracture risk and may be helpful in injury screening and prevention

Effect of a lower extremity preventive training program on physical performance scores in military recruits

Exercise-based preventive training programs are designed to improve movement patterns associated with lower extremity injury risk; however, the impact of these programs on general physical fitness has not been evaluated. The purpose of this study was to compare fitness scores between participants in a preventive training program and a control group. One thousand sixty-eight freshmen from a U.S. Service Academy were cluster-randomized into either the intervention or control group during 6 weeks of summer training. The intervention group performed a preventive training program, specifically the Dynamic Integrated Movement Enhancement (DIME), which is designed to improve lower extremity movement patterns. The control group performed the Army Preparation Drill (PD), a warm-up designed to prepare soldiers for training. Main outcome measures were the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) raw and scaled (for age and sex) scores. Independent t tests were used to assess between-group differences. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to control for the influence of confounding variables. Dynamic Integrated Movement Enhancement group participants completed the APFT 2-mile run 20 seconds faster compared with the PD group (p, 0.001), which corresponded with significantly higher scaled scores (p, 0.001). Army Physical Fitness Test push-up scores were significantly higher in the DIME group (p = 0.041), but there were no significant differences in APFT sit-up scores. The DIME group had significantly higher total APFT scores compared with the PD group (p, 0.001). Similar results were observed in multivariable models after controlling for sex and body mass index (BMI). Committing time to the implementation of a preventive training program does not appear to negatively affect fitness test scores

Association Between Landing Error Scoring System (LESS) Items and the Incidence Rate of Lower Extremity Stress Fracture

Background: Lower extremity stress fracture injuries are a major cause of morbidity in physically active populations. The ability to screen for modifiable risk factors associated with injury is critical in developing injury-prevention programs.Purpose:To determine if baseline Landing Error Scoring System (LESS) scores are associated with the incidence rate of lower extremity stress fracture.Study Design:Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: A total of 1772 participants with no history of lower extremity stress fracture were included. At preinjury baseline, the authors conducted a lower extremity movement assessment during a jump-landing task using the LESS. Incident lower extremity stress fractures were identified during a 4-year follow-up period. Potential incident cases were reviewed by 2 sports medicine fellowship-trained orthopaedic surgeons blinded to baseline LESS data. Univariate and multivariable Poisson regression models were used to estimate the association between baseline total LESS scores, individual LESS items, and the incidence rate ratio (IRR) of lower extremity stress fracture. Results: A total of 94 incident lower extremity stress fractures were documented, for a 5.3% (95% CI, 4.3%-6.5%) cumulative incidence. The overall LESS score was associated with the incidence rate of lower extremity stress fracture. For every additional movement error documented at baseline, there was a 15% increase in the incidence rate of lower extremity stress fracture (IRR, 1.15 [95% CI, 1.02-1.31]; P = .025). In univariate analyses, ankle flexion, stance width, asymmetrical landing, and trunk flexion at initial contact, in addition to overall impression, were associated with the incidence rate of stress fracture. After controlling for sex and year of entry into the study cohort, participants who consistently landed flat-footed or heel-to-toe were 2.33 times (95% CI, 1.36-3.97; P = .002) more likely to sustain a lower extremity stress fracture. Similarly, participants who consistently demonstrated asymmetric landing at initial contact were 2.53 times (95% CI, 1.34-4.74; P = .004) more likely to sustain a stress fracture. Conclusion: Components of the LESS may be associated with increased lower extremity stress fracture risk and may be helpful in efficiently assessing high-risk lower extremity biomechanics in large groups