Low back pain in junior Australian Rules football: a cross-sectional survey of elite juniors, non-elite juniors and non-football playing controls

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Low back pain in junior Australian Rules footballers has not been investigated despite findings that back pain is more prevalent, severe and frequent in senior footballers than non-athletic controls and findings that adolescent back pain is a strong predictor for adult back pain. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence, intensity, quality and frequency of low back pain in junior Australian Rules footballers and a control group and to compare this data between groups.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A cross-sectional survey of male non-elite junior (n = 60) and elite junior players (n = 102) was conducted along with a convenience sample of non-footballers (school children) (n = 100). Subjects completed a self-reported questionnaire on low back pain incorporating the Quadruple Visual Analogue Scale and McGill Pain Questionnaire (short form), along with additional questions adapted from an Australian epidemiological study. Linear Mixed Model (Residual Maximum Likelihood) methods were used to compare differences between groups. Log-linear models were used in the analysis of contingency tables.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>For current, average and best low back pain levels, elite junior players had higher pain levels (p < 0.001), with no difference noted between non-elite juniors and controls for average and best low back pain. For low back pain at worst, there were significant differences in the mean pain scores. The difference between elite juniors and non-elite juniors (p = 0.040) and between elite juniors and controls (p < 0.001) was significant, but not between non-elite juniors and controls. The chance of suffering low back pain increases from 45% for controls, through 55% for non-elite juniors to 66.7% for elite juniors. The chance that a pain sufferer experiences chronic pain is 16% for controls and 41% for non-elite junior and elite junior players. Elite junior players experienced low back pain more frequently (p = 0.002), with no difference in frequency noted between non-elite juniors and controls. Over 25% of elite junior and non-elite junior players reported that back pain impacted their performance some of the time or greater.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>This study demonstrated that when compared with non-elite junior players and non-footballers of a similar age, elite junior players experience back pain more severely and frequently and have higher prevalence and chronicity rates.</p

Low back pain status in elite and semi-elite Australian football codes: a cross-sectional survey of football (soccer), Australian rules, rugby league, rugby union and non-athletic controls

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Our understanding of the effects of football code participation on low back pain (LBP) is limited. It is unclear whether LBP is more prevalent in athletic populations or differs between levels of competition. Thus it was the aim of this study to document and compare the prevalence, intensity, quality and frequency of LBP between elite and semi-elite male Australian football code participants and a non-athletic group.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A cross-sectional survey of elite and semi-elite male Australian football code participants and a non-athletic group was performed. Participants completed a self-reported questionnaire incorporating the Quadruple Visual Analogue Scale (QVAS) and McGill Pain Questionnaire (short form) (MPQ-SF), along with additional questions adapted from an Australian epidemiological study. Respondents were 271 elite players (mean age 23.3, range 17–39), 360 semi-elite players (mean age 23.8, range 16–46) and 148 non-athletic controls (mean age 23.9, range 18–39).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Groups were matched for age (p = 0.42) and experienced the same age of first onset LBP (p = 0.40). A significant linear increase in LBP from the non-athletic group, to the semi-elite and elite groups for the QVAS and the MPQ-SF was evident (p < 0.001). Elite subjects were more likely to experience more frequent (daily or weekly OR 1.77, 95% CI 1.29–2.42) and severe LBP (discomforting and greater OR 1.75, 95% CI 1.29–2.38).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Foolers in Australia have significantly more severe and frequent LBP than a non-athletic group and this escalates with level of competition.</p

Potentiometric analysis of UDP-galactopyranose mutase:stabilization of the flavosemiquinone by substrate

UDP-galactopyranose mutase is a flavoprotein which catalyses the interconversion of UDP-galactopyranose and UDP-galactofuranose. The enzyme is of interest because it provides the activated biosynthetic precursor of galactofuranose, a key cell wall component of many bacterial pathogens. The reaction mechanism of this mutase is intriguing because the anomeric oxygen forms a glycosidic bond, which means that the reaction must proceed by a novel mechanism involving ring breakage and closure. The structure of the enzyme is known, but the mechanism, although speculated on, is not resolved. The overall reaction is electrically neutral but a crypto-redox reaction is suggested by the requirement that the flavin must adopt the reduced form for activity. Herein we report a thermodynamic analysis of the enzyme's flavin cofactor with the objective of defining the system and setting parameters for possible reaction schemes. The analysis shows that the neutral semiquinone (FADH(.)) is stabilized in the presence of substrate and the fully reduced flavin is the anionic FADH(-) rather than the neutral FADH(2). The anionic FADH(-) has the potential to act as a rapid 1-electron donor/acceptor without being slowed by a coupled proton transfer and is therefore an ideal crypto-redox cofactor.</p