Development of A New Tool to Analyze Injury Risk: Turkish Get Up Injury Risk Tool

Injury risk analysis is critical to preventing injuries' physical and psychological impact. The purpose of this study was to develop a new tool to evaluate the risk of injury particular to the Turkish get up (TGU) exercise. According to expert opinions, the Turkish Get Up Injury Risk Tool (TUGIR) is a biomechanical assessment tool developed based on the Turkish Get Up (TGU) movement. It evaluates the alignment and quality of movement during the exercise to assess the risk of injury. The upper and lower quarter Y balance tests (YBTs) and Functional Movement Screening (FMS) were performed to determine construct validity. A total of thirty- three wrestlers performed all the tests. Reliability was assessed by internal consistency determined with Cronbach's alpha coefficients and inter-rater reliability determined with Kendall's coefficient of concordance. The injury risk cut-off value was calculated according to the Angoff method. The internal consistency of the TUGIR was found to be 0.77 and 0.76, respectively, quite reliable for the right and left sides. Kendall's concordance coefficient of the total score was determined to be 0.998 for both sides. The injury risk cut-off value was found to be %72 for the overall TUGIR score. A low to moderate association was observed between TUGIR and YBTs—FMS. The TUGIR is a novel, reliable, and valid tool for assessing injury risk in sports. This tool offers several advantages, including being an easy-to-use, low- cost, and comprehensive method that can reflect sports-specific biomechanical characteristics. This research could lead to the use of this tool to assess the risk of injury in other sports branches

A comparison of quantitative parameters of axial posture and spinal mobility between motor subtypes of Parkinson’s disease

Background and purpose – Parkinson’s disease (PD) is a heterogeneous neurodegenerative disorder characterized by contradictory clinical outcomes among its several subtypes. The disease can manifest with a tremor-dominant (TD) or a non-tremordominant (NTD) phenotype. Although the TD subtype may show a better prognosis, there is limited information on the phenotypic differences regarding the level of axial symptoms. For this reason, in this study it was aimed to make a quantitative comparison of axial posture and spinal mobility between PD with TD and NTD. Methods – This case-control study was conducted on 94 patients with diagnosed PD. A group diagnosis approach was used in the study, such that the diagnosis of each patient was confirmed, and they were assigned to TD and NTD groups by a neurologist expert on movement disorders. Of the patients with PD, 61 were in the TD group, and 33 were in the NTD group. Spinal mouse was used to measure spinal posture and spinal mobility in both sagittal and frontal planes. Results – Two groups of 61 patients (25 male + 36 female) with TD-PD (mean age:\ud 64.49±10.37 years) and 33 patients (20 male +13 female) with NTD-PD (mean age: 63.45±9.11 years) were enrolled in the study. There were no significant differences between the patients with TD and NTD in terms of sagittal and frontal postures (p>0.05). In addition to this, anterior trunk tilt was found to significantly increase as the disease stage advanced in both groups. While the greatest anterior trunk tilt change in the TD-PD group was observed in the 3rd stage, NTD-PD group was in the 2.5th stage. Aside from this, the outcomes of the spinal mobility measurements in the frontal and sagittal planes were similar between the groups (p>0.05). Conclusion – It is widely acknowledged that many clinical aspects of the TD and NTD forms of PD differ; however, in our study, it was observed that there may be no difference in the axial symptoms of the patients with PD in terms of classification according to tremor dominance