ACL injury prevention, more effective with a different way of motor learning?

What happens to the transference of learning proper jump-landing technique in isolation when an individual is expected to perform at a competitive level yet tries to maintain proper jump-landing technique? This is the key question for researchers, physical therapists, athletic trainers and coaches involved in ACL injury prevention in athletes. The need for ACL injury prevention is clear, however, in spite of these ongoing initiatives and reported early successes, ACL injury rates and the associated gender disparity have not diminished. One problem could be the difficulties with the measurements of injury rates and the difficulties with the implementation of thorough large scale injury prevention programs. A second issue could be the transition from conscious awareness during training sessions on technique in the laboratory to unexpected and automatic movements during a training or game involves complicated motor control adaptations. The purpose of this paper is to highlight the issue of motor learning in relation to ACL injury prevention and to post suggestions for future research. ACL injury prevention programs addressing explicit rules regarding desired landing positions by emphasizing proper alignment of the hip, knee, and ankle are reported in the literature. This may very well be a sensible way, but the use of explicit strategies may be less suitable for the acquisition of the control of complex motor skills (Maxwell et al. J Sports Sci 18:111-120, 2000). Sufficient literature on motor learning and it variations point in that direction

Methodological Characteristics and Future Directions for Plyometric Jump Training Research: A Scoping Review

Recently, there has been a proliferation of published articles on the effect of plyometric jump training, including several review articles and meta-analyses. However, these types of research articles are generally of narrow scope. Furthermore, methodological limitations among studies (e.g., a lack of active/passive control groups) prevent the generalization of results, and these factors need to be addressed by researchers. On that basis, the aims of this scoping review were to (1) characterize the main elements of plyometric jump training studies (e.g., training protocols) and (2) provide future directions for research. From 648 potentially relevant articles, 242 were eligible for inclusion in this review. The main issues identified related to an insufficient number of studies conducted in females, youths, and individual sports (~ 24.0, ~ 37.0, and ~ 12.0% of overall studies, respectively); insufficient reporting of effect size values and training prescription (~ 34.0 and ~ 55.0% of overall studies, respectively); and studies missing an active/passive control group and randomization (~ 40.0 and ~ 20.0% of overall studies, respectively). Furthermore, plyometric jump training was often combined with other training methods and added to participants' daily training routines (~ 47.0 and ~ 39.0% of overall studies, respectively), thus distorting conclusions on its independent effects. Additionally, most studies lasted no longer than 7 weeks. In future, researchers are advised to conduct plyometric training studies of high methodological quality (e.g., randomized controlled trials). More research is needed in females, youth, and individual sports. Finally, the identification of specific dose-response relationships following plyometric training is needed to specifically tailor intervention programs, particularly in the long term