Hamstring extensibility has been defined as a factor to diminished dynamic stability and therefore increased risk of injury. The purpose of this study was to analyse the effects of hamstring tightness and fatigue on dynamic stability and agility. Nineteen participants were divided between the normal extensibility group (NEG) (n = 9, 82.2° ± 12.4°) and hamstrings tightness group (HTG) (n = 10, 64° ± 4.9°) using the passive straight leg raise test. To analyse dynamic stability and agility, they performed the modified Star Excursion Balance Test (mSEBT) and Dynamic Postural Stability Index (DPSI), and hexagon agility test, respectively, before and after a fatigue protocol. A two-way repeated measures ANOVA was used to determine differences among conditions: NEG vs. HTG, and rested vs. fatigued. HTG showed a significantly lower reach in the anterior direction in the mSEBT in pre- and post-fatigue than NEG. Participants in the NEG showed poor stability after landing in the mediolateral direction on DPSI post-fatigue. No significant changes were found in agility related with the group nor fatigue state. Participants with hamstring extensibility reduction has no differences in dynamic stability after landing nor agility after fatigue test, but significantly affects reaching distances during one-leg balance. As a conclusion, a reduction in range of motion in HTG was observed, but no other effects were observed on performance and dynamic stability after a local fatigue protocol depending on hamstring extensibility.

Cycling is a recreational activity that helps to prevent different diseases. The practice of this popular worldwide sport requires the cyclist to maintain a particular posture in contact with the pedals, handlebars, and saddle for long periods of time. Therefore, the study of the pressure exerted on the saddle is of great importance as it is directly related to the reduction of perineal injuries and pathologies. The present research aims to study the effect on comfort and saddle pressures when performing a cycloergometer test using 3 saddle positions: own setback position (P1), forward [-10% (P2)], backward [+10% (P3)] at two exercise intensities (Ventilatory Threshold: VT1 and VT2). 34 amateur cyclists (14 women, 20 men) were analysed. The results showed that comfort was significantly reduced in P3 (p < 0.01) and significantly increased for some items in the VT1 condition and for men in P1 regarding overall comfort (p < 0.01, ES = 0.105). In addition, the average and maximum pressure in the pubic region were significantly higher at P3 (p < 0.001) and men show higher values for average pressure compared to women (p = 0.006, ES = 0.235). In conclusion, backward saddle setback positions increase pressure and discomfort to recreational cyclists in comparison with the forward and own setback position, which could increase the risk of injury.

Concurrent biofeedback has been demonstrated to be an effective strategy for reducing running-related injuries (RRI) [1–3]. The majority of these RRI are overuse injuries related to impact accelerations [4,5]. However, information regarding impact accelerations is not accessible to the entire population since it requires an accelerometry system. The objective of this study was to investigate the validity and reliability of a new accelerometry system placed directly into the treadmill (AccTrea) and compare it to the traditional system placed directly on the athlete’s body (AccAthl). Thirty recreational athletes with no history of lower body injuries performed two running tests on different days. They ran for 5 min at 10 km/h and at a 0% slope and acceleration impacts and spatiotemporal parameters were collected in two sets of 10 s during the last minute taken in each measurement session. The first session intended to assess the validity of an AccTrea versus an AccAthl, and the second session intended to test its reliability. The results showed that AccTrea is a valid and reliable tool for measuring spatiotemporal parameters such as step length (validity intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) = 0.94; reliability ICC = 0.92), step time (validity ICC = 0.95; reliability ICC = 0.96), and step frequency (validity ICC = 0.95; reliability ICC = 0.96) during running. The peak acceleration impact variables manifested a high reliability for both left (reliability ICC = 0.88) and right legs (reliability ICC = 0.85), and the peak impact asymmetry demonstrated a modest validity (ICC = 0.55). The valid and reliable results make the AccTrea system an appropriate tool with which to inform athletes about their running mechanics, bringing the laboratory data closer to the running community.