The hamstrings muscle group has been plagued by injury, injury recurrence, improper rehabilitation and impaired performance.
Bahr and Holme (2000) proposed that injuries result from a complex interaction of multiple risk factors and events. In terms of prevention and rehabilitation, this study therefore proposed that a ‘multivariate statistic approach’ should be used. Current literature, though extensive, provides varied and conflicting approaches to understanding injuries and their mechanisms. Preventative measures are currently limited by an incomplete understanding of injury causative factors; including both internal and external factors, and the inciting event itself (Bahr and Krosshaug, 2005). An examination of the adjunct neural and biomechanical factors in an injury situation will allow for the development of a comprehensive injury occurrence, and thus prevention, model.
Jonhagen (2005) cited muscle injuries as the most common injuries in sport, and emphasised their prevalence in both this, and a general functional setting. Muscle strains represent 41% of all injuries in English professional football clubs (Dadebo et al, 2004) and constitute 10-19% of all medically treated acute injuries (Bahr and Krosshaug, 2005).
To combat the causative factors of soft tissue injury, it is vital to appreciate that all prevention methods should be based on the premise that tissues accommodate to physical stress by “…altering their structure and composition to best meet the mechanical demands of … loading” (Mueller and Maluf, 2002).
With soft tissue (primarily muscle) injuries having such a major effect in both a sporting and functional rehabilitation discipline, it seems appropriate to prioritise specific injuries within this field, in order to maximise the benefits of any findings. Justification for the importance of the study of hamstrings and their subsequent rehabilitation is provided by the results of numerous research papers to be discussed in part two of this blog series.
