Anthropometric evaluation of ratio between extremity length and body length in basketball player adolescents

Backgrounds and Study Aim: To determine whether the limb length-to-body ratio in young basketball players (15-18 years) is different in comparison to those who do not play basketball, and to contribute to the hypothesis that those with which body type can be more successful in basketball . Materials and Methods: The measurements were performed on 42 individuals (29 boys, 13 girls) who have played basketball for at least three years and 41 individuals (31 boys, 10 girls) who did not play basketball. A standard form was prepared for these measurements and the measurements were made according to this form. The data were summarized using mean and standard deviation values, and their accordance with normal distribution was evaluated with the Shapiro-Wilk test. The t-test was used for evaluating the independent samples. Values of p<0.05 were considered significant. The measurements were performed using a tape measure. Results: As a result of the measurements, the height/fa (forearm) ratio was 7.09 in non-basketball players and 6.71 in basketball players. The height/hl (hand length) ratio was 10.0 in non-basketball players and 9.06 in basketball players. The height /lll (lower limb length) ratio was 1.86 in non-basketball players and 1.73 in basketball players. The height /tl (thigh length) ratio was 3.28 in non-basketball players and 3.41 in basketball players. According to our findings, the ratio of forearm, hand, thigh and leg to body were increased in basketball players. There was no significant difference in terms of gender. Conclusion: Athletes possess anthropological and physiological characteristics specific to the sport in which they participate. In terms of limb length, there was an anthropometric difference between the young population who played basketball and the normal population

The effect of sports shoes on flat foot

Objective: This study was conducted to determine the effects of participation in sports on the structural deformities of the foot. Methods: A total of 2013 athletes (1301 males, 712 females) who had regularly participated in sports for a minimum of three years were included in the study. Screening of the sole was performed using a podoscope as it is a reliable and practical device. The structure of the sole was evaluated with the highly valid Staheli index. Results: A significant relationship was detected between the ages of the athletes, years in sport, branch of sports variables and the prevalence of flat foot. However, no significant relationship was found between the athletes’ gender and the prevalence of flat foot. Conclusion: It is thought that the training regimes, the floor on which the sports is performed and the shoes used in sports had effects on flat foot deformity. Based on our results, we assert that redesigning the competition shoes and using sports shoes with arch support during warm-ups, running and other sportive and educational drills outside the routine activities of the sports branch may be beneficial for foot health

Investigating the effects of wrestling gear in flatfoot deformity of wrestlers

Purpose: In this study, our aim was to determine the effects of wrestling shoes, wrestling mats and wrestling styles on postural deformation of the foot and to elaborate its possible causes. Material: Study group comprised of 158 athletes (109 males, 59 females) from 26 different countries who participated in the 12th World University Wrestling Championship. Of the athletes, 102 (59 females, 43 males) performed in freestyle and 56 performed in Greco-Roman style. The age range of the athletes was 19 to 31 years and they have done wrestling for 3 to 18 years. Were evaluated to determine the relationship between flatfoot deformity and gender, age, wrestling style and years in the sport. Footprint parameters were used to determine and evaluate the overall structure of the foot. The Staheli and the Chippaux-Smirak indexes were used in the study. Statistical analyses were performed using the SPSS v.21.0 software, with the significance level set at α=0.05. Results: No significant relationship was found either between the gender of the wrestlers or their age and their pes planus state. A significant relationship was detected between the wrestling style performed and the wrestlers’ pes planus state, and between the years in the sport and their pes planus state. Conclusion: The fact that wrestlers wear the wrestling shoes for a long time can be a cause of pes planus. The center of mass of freestyle wrestlers shifts during continuous feet movement, and the surface of their soles extends the contact surface on the mat to maintain balance. This situation can also lead to a higher prevalence of pes planus in wrestlers. In addition, the wrestling shoes wrap around the Achilles tendon and thus the stretching of this tendon is restricted. Such restriction strengthens the opinion that freestyle wrestlers experience pes planus more

Assessing the efficacy and safety of mycophenolate mofetil versus azathioprine in patients with autoimmune hepatitis (CAMARO trial): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Currently, the standard therapy for autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) consists of a combination of prednisolone and azathioprine. However, 15% of patients are intolerant to azathioprine which necessitates cessation of azathioprine or changes in therapy. In addition, not all patients achieve complete biochemical response (CR). Uncontrolled data indicate that mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) can induce CR in a majority of patients. Better understanding of first-line treatment and robust evidence from randomised clinical trials are needed. The aim of this study was to explore the potential benefits of MMF as compared to azathioprine, both combined with prednisolone, as induction therapy in a randomised controlled trial in patients with treatment-naive AIH. METHODS: CAMARO is a randomised (1:1), open-label, parallel-group, multicentre superiority trial. All patients with AIH are screened for eligibility. Seventy adult patients with AIH from fourteen centres in the Netherlands and Belgium will be randomised to receive MMF or azathioprine. Both treatment arms will start with prednisolone as induction therapy. The primary outcome is biochemical remission, defined as serum levels of alanine aminotransferase and immunoglobulin G below the upper limit of normal. Secondary outcomes include safety and tolerability of MMF and azathioprine, time to remission, changes in Model For End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD)-score, adverse events, and aspects of quality of life. The study period will last for 24 weeks. DISCUSSION: The CAMARO trial investigates whether treatment with MMF and prednisolone increases the proportion of patients in remission compared with azathioprine and prednisolone as the current standard treatment strategy. In addition, we reflect on the challenges of conducting a randomized trial in rare diseases. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT 2016-001038-91 . Prospectively registered on 18 April 2016

Assessing the efficacy and safety of mycophenolate mofetil versus azathioprine in patients with autoimmune hepatitis (CAMARO trial) : study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Currently, the standard therapy for autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) consists of a combination of prednisolone and azathioprine. However, 15% of patients are intolerant to azathioprine which necessitates cessation of azathioprine or changes in therapy. In addition, not all patients achieve complete biochemical response (CR). Uncontrolled data indicate that mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) can induce CR in a majority of patients. Better understanding of first-line treatment and robust evidence from randomised clinical trials are needed. The aim of this study was to explore the potential benefits of MMF as compared to azathioprine, both combined with prednisolone, as induction therapy in a randomised controlled trial in patients with treatment-naive AIH. METHODS: CAMARO is a randomised (1:1), open-label, parallel-group, multicentre superiority trial. All patients with AIH are screened for eligibility. Seventy adult patients with AIH from fourteen centres in the Netherlands and Belgium will be randomised to receive MMF or azathioprine. Both treatment arms will start with prednisolone as induction therapy. The primary outcome is biochemical remission, defined as serum levels of alanine aminotransferase and immunoglobulin G below the upper limit of normal. Secondary outcomes include safety and tolerability of MMF and azathioprine, time to remission, changes in Model For End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD)-score, adverse events, and aspects of quality of life. The study period will last for 24 weeks. DISCUSSION: The CAMARO trial investigates whether treatment with MMF and prednisolone increases the proportion of patients in remission compared with azathioprine and prednisolone as the current standard treatment strategy. In addition, we reflect on the challenges of conducting a randomized trial in rare diseases. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT 2016-001038-91. Prospectively registered on 18 April 2016. GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT: [Image: see text] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-022-06890-w

Assessing the efficacy and safety of mycophenolate mofetil versus azathioprine in patients with autoimmune hepatitis (CAMARO trial): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background: Currently, the standard therapy for autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) consists of a combination of prednisolone and azathioprine. However, 15% of patients are intolerant to azathioprine which necessitates cessation of azathioprine or changes in therapy. In addition, not all patients achieve complete biochemical response (CR). Uncontrolled data indicate that mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) can induce CR in a majority of patients. Better understanding of first-line treatment and robust evidence from randomised clinical trials are needed. The aim of this study was to explore the potential benefits of MMF as compared to azathioprine, both combined with prednisolone, as induction therapy in a randomised controlled trial in patients with treatment-naive AIH. Methods: CAMARO is a randomised (1:1), open-label, parallel-group, multicentre superiority trial. All patients with AIH are screened for eligibility. Seventy adult patients with AIH from fourteen centres in the Netherlands and Belgium will be randomised to receive MMF or azathioprine. Both treatment arms will start with prednisolone as induction therapy. The primary outcome is biochemical remission, defined as serum levels of alanine aminotransferase and immunoglobulin G below the upper limit of normal. Secondary outcomes include safety and tolerability of MMF and azathioprine, time to remission, changes in Model For End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD)-score, adverse events, and aspects of quality of life. The study period will last for 24 weeks. Discussion: The CAMARO trial investigates whether treatment with MMF and prednisolone increases the proportion of patients in remission compared with azathioprine and prednisolone as the current standard treatment strategy. In addition, we reflect on the challenges of conducting a randomized trial in rare diseases. Trial registration: EudraCT 2016-001038-91. Prospectively registered on 18 April 2016. Graphical Abstract: [Figure not available: see fulltext.]

An open-label randomised-controlled trial of azathioprine vs. mycophenolate mofetil for the induction of remission in treatment-naive autoimmune hepatitis

Abstract: Background & Aims Patients with autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) almost inevitably require lifelong immunosuppressive treatment. There is genuine concern about the efficacy and tolerability of the current standard combination therapy of prednisolone and azathioprine. Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) has emerged as an alternative option. The aim of this study was to compare MMF to azathioprine as induction therapy. Methods In this 24-week, prospective, randomised, open-label, multicentre superiority trial, 70 patients with treatment-naive AIH received either MMF or azathioprine, both in combination with prednisolone. The primary endpoint was biochemical remission defined as normalisation of serum levels of alanine aminotransferase and immunoglobulin G after 24 weeks of treatment. Secondary endpoints included safety and tolerability. Results Seventy patients (mean 57.9 years (standard deviation (SD) 14.0); 72.9% female) were randomly assigned to the MMF plus prednisolone (n=39) or azathioprine plus prednisolone (n=31) group. The primary endpoint was met in 56.4% and 29.0% of patients assigned to the MMF group and the azathioprine group, respectively (difference, 27.4 percentage points; 95% confidence interval (CI), 4.0 to 46.7; p=0.022). The MMF group exhibited higher complete biochemical response rates at 6 months (72.2% vs. 32.3%; p=0.004). No serious adverse events occurred in patients who received MMF (0%) but serious adverse events were reported in four patients who received azathioprine (12.9%) (p=0.034). Two patients in the MMF group (5.1%) and eight patients in the azathioprine group (25.8%) discontinued treatment owing to adverse events or serious adverse events (p=0.018). Conclusions In patients with treatment-naive AIH, MMF with prednisolone achieved a significantly higher rate of biochemical remission at 24 weeks compared to azathioprine combined with prednisolone. Azathioprine use was associated with more (serious) adverse events leading to cessation of treatment, suggesting superior tolerability of MMF. Impact and implications This randomised controlled trial directly compares azathioprine and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), both in combination with prednisolone, for the induction of biochemical remission in treatment-naive patients with autoimmune hepatitis (AIH). Achieving complete remission is desirable to prevent disease progression. Patients assigned to the MMF group reached biochemical remission more often and experienced fewer adverse events. The findings in this trial may contribute to the re-evaluation of international guidelines for the standard of care in treatment-naive patients with AIH