Cited by 272Knee injuries and reconstruction techniquesLower Extremity Biomechanics and PathologiesMuscle activation and electromyography studies

The influence of gender on knee kinematics, kinetics and muscle activation patterns during side-step cutting

Sigward, Susan M., Powers, Christopher M.·2006·Clinical Biomechanics

Abstract

Background It has been suggested that gender differences in the performance of athletic maneuvers is a contributory factor with respect to the disproportionate incidence of non-contact anterior cruciate ligament injury in female athletes. The purpose of this study was to evaluate gender differences in knee joint kinematics, kinetics and muscle activation during a side-step cutting.Methods Three-dimensional kinematics, ground reaction forces (2400 Hz) and electromyographic activity (surface electrodes) were recorded during the early deceleration phase of side-step cutting in 30 healthy collegiate soccer players (15 male, 15 female). Gender differences in knee joint kinematics, peak moments, net joint moment impulse and average muscle EMG intensity were evaluated with one-tailed t-tests.Findings No differences in kinematics were found. However, when compared to males, females demonstrated a smaller peak knee flexor moment (1.4 (0.8) vs. 2.1 (0.8) Nm/kg, P = 0.05) and a greater knee adductor moment (0.43 (0.5) vs. 0.01 (0.3) Nm/kg, P < 0.01) during early deceleration. In addition, females displayed greater average quadriceps EMG intensity than males (191% vs. 151% maximum voluntary isometric contraction, P = 0.02).Interpretation In general, females experienced increased frontal plane moments and decreased sagittal plane moments during early deceleration. These differences are suggestive of an "at risk" pattern in that frontal plane support of the knee is afforded primarily by passive structures (including the anterior cruciate ligament). Furthermore, increased quadriceps activity and smaller net flexor moments may suggest less sagittal plane protection (i.e., increased tendency towards anterior tibial translation).

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2005.08.001

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sigward, S. M., & Powers, C. M.
Affiliations
University of Southern California (US)
Venue
Clinical Biomechanics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-01
Volume
21
Issue
1
Pages
41-48
ISSN
0268-0033 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2166051063
Cited by
272
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 28
FWCI
10.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Clinical Biomechanics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Knee injuries and reconstruction techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Lower Extremity Biomechanics and Pathologies
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Muscle activation and electromyography studies
Keywords
gender differences, knee kinematics, knee kinetics, muscle activation, sidestep cutting, non-contact anterior cruciate ligament injury, female athletes, quadriceps activation, ground reaction force, soccer players, anterior tibial translation
MeSH terms
Biomechanical Phenomena, Electromyography, Physical Exertion, Female, Humans, Kinetics, Knee Joint, Locomotion, Male, Muscle Contraction, Sex Factors, Soccer, Range of Motion, Articular, Muscle, Skeletal

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review