Last chance to sign up for 2016 health coverage is January 31

Time is running out if you still need health coverage for 2016. Only a few days remain before the final January 31 deadline to enroll at HealthCare.gov.

How I built a Half Million Dollar Fitness Company in 18 Months

Here is the list of the upcoming modules….

How to buy a domain and set up hosting.

 How to add a theme, plugins, which plugins you should use and why.

 How to create your avatar.

 How to develop your USP and your hook.

 Matching your solution to your target audience.

 How to write headlines and sales copy, a list of examples.

 How to add content to your website.

 Help you outline your sales funnel.

 Email marketing, the big picture.

 How to set up a Google account (analytics, webmaster tools and Xml sitemaps).

 How to set up a Facebook page.

 How to set up Youtube.

 Uploading a video to Youtube.

 How to rank your Youtube videos in Google and in Youtube.

 How to set up a Bing listing

 How to set up a Yelp listing.

 Which other directories you should use (download our list).

 How to make a sales video that converts.

 Youtube custom URL and citation follow up.

 How to syndicate your website content automatically to your social accounts.

 How to set up a silo structure for maximum SEO benefits and how to optimize your on-page SEO.

 How to set up a referral program for a massive ROI.

 How to run a successful Facebook Ad campaign and set up Facebook re-targeting.

 How to rank your website in Google maps.

 How to avoid the money pitfalls on Google Adwords.

 How to rank your website on Google for thousands of towns and thousands of services in under 1 hour.

 How to rank your website on Google for your most competitive keywords.

The post How I built a Half Million Dollar Fitness Company in 18 Months appeared first on European Personal Training Institute.

A Germaphobe Visits the Gym

First of all, I think the term germophobe conjures up images of something negative or strange. But who does like germs? Who gravitates toward germs, hoping and aiming to encounter them as much as possible in everyday life? Feeling good and being healthy are goals that align perfectly with fitness, so if I wear the germophobe label because I go the extra mile—pun intended—for wellness, I suppose I’ll wear it proudly!

Here’s some of the anti-germophobe things I’ve encountered at the gym. Sanitizer dispensers filled with a liquid with a deep-blue hue and a familiar scent. I went to the front desk and asked, “Is this Windex?”

Indeed it was.

Another irritant: sweat lines running down the sides of a cardio machine. A little gag-worthy in my opinion. And another? People hacking with a slight turn of the head.

But we must work out, so what do we do!

First, there is the “Windex” concern. Seeing something in the sanitizer dispensers gives us the warm fuzzy feeling that we are being proactive by cleaning equipment before we use it. In reality, we may just be ensuring a streak-free shine on the chrome railing of the stair climber. Bring your own sanitizer like Lysol or Clorox wipes. To keep from carrying around the big cylinder most wipes come in, grab a Ziploc and seal several wipes inside and carry that around instead. Ignore strange looks. They’re just taking notes so they can do it next time.

Wash hands after coming into the gym. You just touched the door handle. Yes. It’s that serious. I also recommend washing again just before you leave and using a napkin to push open the door if you can’t use your foot or hip.

Don’t worry about appearing rude; switch machines if the person next to you is hacking, sneezing, or otherwise distributing germs. You can do it with couth if you must. A quick shoulder roll and a “whew” makes it seem like you’ve done all you can on that machine and simply must go. It may seem strange, though, when you start up that same cardio a row over. That’s why I just stop abruptly and walk away.

Also, don’t worry about appearing rude if someone suspicious (watery eyes, nasally voice, excessively clearing throat etc.) is talking in your face. Ask them if they are sick and respond in the appropriate manner. Would you prefer an awkward moment or a week shaking from chills and fever?

As a note, it’s preferable if you just don’t allow anyone to talk in your face.

On the other side, it’s important to put out the same energy and common curtesy we’d like from our fellow gym users. Here’s a quick example: bring enough wipes to give equipment a once-over after you’re done as well. Many a face has brightened on people standing by waiting for my machine, particularly in the indoor cycling room, when they see me wipe down. The smile and “hey, thanks!” are always genuine.

What are some of your stay-well practices at the gym? Let me know in the comments section! A germophobe is always looking for new tips.

The post A Germaphobe Visits the Gym appeared first on The NFPT Blog.

Fit versus Fat – Which Rules Your Health?

Can a person be fit, yet also be fat? For most of us, a fair assumption would be to believe (at least initially) that the answer is ‘no’, but when you examine the research on this relationship, and the subsequent effects on mortality rates, there is no universal agreement. While plenty of research supports the ‘no’ assumption, a growing number of studies now also support the notion that a person could be fat, yet also be healthy (1, 2). So what are we to believe and use as our compass when it comes to education and programming for activity and weight loss?

First, we should examine definitions of ‘fit’ and ‘fat’ as they alone contribute to this confusion, Then, we should also examine the nature of some of the studies conducted that may have received widespread media coverage without proper merit.

Let’s start first with definitions of overweight and obesity. A measure of body fat percentage would appear to provide a logical assessment of an individual’s level of fat, but the unfortunate reality is that the validity and reliability of in vivo, cost-efficient, field testing for measuring percent body fat remains highly questionable. Consequently, much of science relies upon the more objective measurement of body mass index (BMI) or the Quetelet Index that has replaced the older height-to-weight tables used prior to the mid-1980s. Research supporting mortality to BMI scores (not % fat) is quite strong and defined within the categories established for normal, overweight, obese and morbidly obese (18.5 – 24.9; 25.0 – 29.9; 30.0 – 39.9; 40.0+ respectively) (3, 4). We generally believe that the more body fat a person has, the greater their risk for disease, and because higher BMI scores generally reflect excess fat in most individuals, these scores have been correlated to increased risk of disease (Table 1-1) (3).

Table 1-1: BMI scores and the increased risk for morbidity

Although controversial (as it does not distinguish the source of body weight), one common misconception with BMI is that it is a simple height-to-weight relationship, when in fact it is not. While the calculation uses the measures of height and weight, it is actually a mass-to-surface area relation (Kg/M²) which examines their relationship differently

However, BMI certainly does have limitations with older populations, certain ethnicities (e.g., African-American and Hispanic-American women) and with hypertrophied individuals (to a small degree). To demonstrate this last point and to dispel some mythology around BMI and athletic individuals, consider the following where only one segment of the athletic population skews BMI scores. The standard U.S. formula for calculating BMI = weight (in lbs.) x 703 ÷ height (in inches) ÷ height (in inches):

• Endurance female athlete standing 5’7” and weighing 125 lbs. BMI = 19.57 (normal range)


• Endurance male athlete standing 5’10” and weighing 160 lbs. BMI = 29.96 (normal range)


• Hypertrophied female athlete standing 5’6” and weighing 155 lbs. BMI = 25.01 (cusp of normal to overweight)


• Hypertrophied male athlete standing 5’10” and weighing 220 lbs. BMI = 31.56 (obese category)

Regardless, based upon the information presented, it would appear that individuals with higher BMIs expose themselves to greater risk for morbidity and mortality. But, as mentioned previously, the limitations regarding fit (athletic) individual presents an interesting loophole that researchers have been investigating and it is their discoveries that have provided contradiction to the long-standing notion of fat (i.e., higher BMI scores) and mortality.

One argument stems from the limitation in correlating BMI scores to percentage body fat. For example, a 5’11” male weighing 205 lbs., who is physically active with 12% body fat may be very healthy biometrically, yet measure in with a BMI of 28.6. BMI score of overweight – yes, but according to the National Institutes of Health's (National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute – NHLBI) guidelines on the identification, evaluation and treatment of overweight and obesity in adults, individuals who are overweight can be considered healthy if their waist size is under 35 inches (women) or 40 inches (men), and if they do not have two or more of the following conditions (5):

• Elevated blood pressure


• High blood sugar


• High cholesterol

The NHLBI is not alone in its position – Nichols and colleagues examined data on 43,265 participants enrolled in the Aerobics Center Longitudinal Study between 1979 and 2003 and discovered that overweight and obese people had no greater risk for many diseases and mortality than normal weight people as long as they were metabolically fit despite their excess weight (6).

This term ‘metabolically fit’ describes an individual who may qualify as overweight or obese, yet demonstrates a healthy biometric profile (i.e., no insulin resistance, normal blood sugar levels, healthy lipid profiles and no elevated blood pressure). Interestingly, half of the obese participants in this study qualified as metabolically fit and when comparing their risk of premature mortality against the other obese individuals who had at least two poor health markers, the metabolically fit had a 38% lower risk of premature mortality. It appears that excess weight when combined with metabolic abnormalities is the problem – leading to insulin resistance, hypertension, elevated lipid, etc. Movement and activity involve muscles that utilize blood glucose which maintains insulin sensitivity. Likewise, movement and activity also help regulate blood lipids and blood pressure.

In studies performed by Ekelund and colleagues, and Katzmarzyk and colleagues, they adopted a different approach in examining this concept of metabolic fitness (1, 7). These studies collectively examined the effects of being sedentary plus other lifestyle and biological markers (e.g., obesity) as indicators of mortality. What they both discovered is that movement, or rather the lack thereof, appears to be the leading contributor to pre-mature mortality. Ekelund’s study compared the combined associations between various levels of physical activity, BMI, and waist circumference (WC) with mortality (1). Physical activity was divided into four categories: inactive, moderately inactive, moderately active and active. Interestingly, the greatest reduction in mortality risk was observed when transitioning between the two lowest activity groups across all levels of general (BMI) and abdominal adiposity (WC). Shifting from being inactive to moderately inactive, regardless of BMI or WC reduced overall mortality rates by 16 – 30%, suggesting that small amounts of movement and activity may be beneficial to improving metabolic health. For example, an average person who stands (e.g., light office activity) for 3½ – 4 hours total a day is considered inactive, but if he or she can manage to include a 20-minute walk each day that expends an additional 100 kcal, that qualifies the person as moderately inactive.

Katzmarzyk’s study by comparison, examined over 17,000 individuals and discovered that sitting, regardless of how much exercise one performed, contributed significantly to premature mortality (7). In other words, the positive effects of exercise and recreational activity appear to be insufficient in undoing all the negative effects of sitting upon metabolic health – sitting increases insulin resistance, elevates triglyceride levels, lowers HDL-cholesterol and decreases lipoprotein lipase (LPL) activity at muscles cells. LPL is the enzyme responsible for fatty acid uptake into muscle cells, which consequently will elevate blood lipid levels and visceral fat deposition when it becomes less active at muscle cells.

Although Kramer and colleagues also supported the notion of metabolic fitness, they did discover that individuals with higher BMI who were metabolically fit still possessed a higher risk of heart disease over comparably metabolically-fit individuals with normal BMI scores (8). Their results did demonstrate however, that it is an unhealthy metabolic state that resulted in a more consistent link to mortality than excess body weight.

But, research also disputes this concept of metabolically-fit. Hogstrom and colleagues examined 1,317,713 younger people who enlisted in the Swedish army between 1969 and 1996 (9). While their findings did correlate an inverse relationship between fitness and mortality in the most fit group (top 20%) and reduced mortality in normal and overweight individuals, it did not do so with obese individuals. Furthermore, they also discovered that unfit normal weight individuals had a 30% reduction in death rates than the more obese, fit individuals. Unlike most studies that examine relationships of mortality with BMI or activity in older population groups, this study investigated outcomes in young men, which may offer some explanation for their findings. This certainly merits further investigation.

Pulsford and colleagues followed 3,720 men and 1,412 women for 16 years, investigating the effects of sitting time (at work, during leisure time, while watching TV, during leisure time excluding TV, and at work and during leisure time combined) as an indicator of mortality (10). Contrary to the findings of Katzmarzyk’s study which demonstrated how sitting behaviors diminish metabolic fitness and subsequently increased all-cause mortality independent of exercise and activity, these researchers found no association.

So, considering the information presented here, what conclusions can we draw? First consider the variants that exist in research design. For instance, in some of these studies the researchers only compared weight with the risk of mortality instead of examining metabolic health – some apparently healthy, but perhaps overweight or obese individuals might have had signs of elevated blood pressure, blood sugar or cholesterol that was not monitored or measured during the study. Although the study by Pulsford and colleagues disputed the existence of metabolic health, a criticism of their study is the fact that while no subjects entered the study with existing or previous heart disease, they never really considered metabolic health throughout their study. Other trials compared healthy, obese or overweight people to unhealthy, obese or overweight people rather than comparing them to normal-weight individuals. Furthermore, many of these studies are longitudinal in design (e.g., longer periods like 16 years) where one can never control or estimate the influence of genetic and environmental variants on study outcomes.

Regardless, one underlying and unifying point appears throughout; although excess fat may increase your risk of morbidity and pre-mature mortality, movement and activity, even in small dosages, coupled with strategies to improve metabolic fitness are our best line of defense for living a long and productive life.

References:

1. Ekelund U, et al. (2015). Physical activity and all-cause mortality across levels of overall and abdominal adiposity in European men and women: The European Prospective Investigation into cancer and nutrition study. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 2015: doi: 10:3945/ajen.114.100065


2. Nichols M, Townsend N, Scarborough P and Rayner M, (2014). Cardiovascular disease in Europe 2014: epidemiological update. European Heat Journal, 35(29): 2950-2959. doi: 10.1093/eurhneart/ehu299


3. Berrington de Gonzalez A, et al., (2010). Body-Mass Index and Mortality among 1.46 Million White Adults. New England Journal of Medicine, 363:2211-2219.


4. Pan WH, Yeh WT, Chen HJ, Chuang SY, Chang HY, Chen L, and Wahlqvist ML, (2012). The U-shaped relationship between BMI and all-cause mortality contrasts with a progressive increase in medical expenditure: a prospective cohort study. Asia Pacific Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 21(4):577-87.


5. Obesity Education Initiative Expert Panel on the Identification, Evaluation, and Treatment of Obesity in Adults (US), (1998). Clinical Guidelines on the Identification, Evaluation, and Treatment of Overweight and Obesity in Adults: The Evidence Report. National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, Report No.: 98-4083, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK2003/. Retrieved 01/14/16.


6. Nichols M, Townsend N, Scarborough P and Rayner M, (2014). Cardiovascular disease in Europe 2014: epidemiological update. European Heart Journal, 35(29): 2950-2959. doi: 10.1093/eurhneart/ehu299.


7. Katzmarzyk PT, Church TS, Craig CL, and Bouchard C, (2009). Sitting time and mortality from all causes, cardiovascular disease and cancer. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 41(5): 998-1005.


8. Kramer CK, Zinman B, and Retnakaran, R (2014). Are Metabolically Healthy Overweight and Obesity Benign Conditions? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Annals of Internal Medicine, 159(11):758-769.


9. Hogstrom G, Nordstrom A, and Nordstrom P (2015). Aerobic fitness in late adolescence and the risk of early death: a prospective cohort study of 1.3 million Swedish men. International Journal of Epidemiology, 44(6): December 20, 2015 [epub ahead of print]. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyv321.


10. Pulsford RM, Stamatakis E, Britton AR, Brunner EJ and Hillson M (2015). Associations of sitting behaviors with all-cause mortality over a 16-year follow-up: The Whitehall II study. International Journal of Epidemiology, 44(6): 1909-1916.

The post Fit versus Fat – Which Rules Your Health? appeared first on NASM Blog.

Personal Trainer Gold Coast

Personal Trainer Gold Coast - What is Personal Training?

Over the years, personal training has emerged as one of the most popular forms of workouts. And for this reason alone, it is strong enough for it to be included in the fitness charts of the Gold Coast personal training. While the popularity may be unquestionable, truth is, outsiders, looking to hire a personal trainer on the Gold Coast are still unaware of the wonders of fitness training.

There are many factors which add to making personal training a strong preference amongst trainers as well as fitness enthusiasts. If you're looking to broaden your knowledge about it, you would have to begin from the basics and then gradually you will get an idea as to why it is such a phenomenon in many of our Gold Coast’s parks and beaches.



Watch the full video here: https://vimeo.com/152755884​

Walking or the Elliptical Machine?

Walking and using the elliptical machine are activities often employed as part of a general fitness program. While they are alike in many respects, it’s important to keep in mind that one might have an edge on the other depending on a client’s state of health and fitness goals.

According to several recent studies, elliptical training leads to a greater activation of muscles in the buttocks and thighs than does walking, but less activation in calf muscles.1,2 It’s important to note that training using the elliptical machine also puts greater strain on the lower back than walking. That’s due to how the sequence of how the muscles are recruited, and it’s a consideration for people with known back problems.

Movements on the elliptical machine also involve less weight bearing. According to one study, walking causes 112 percent of someone’s body weight to strike the ground with every step, while only 73 percent does in elliptical training.3 This might suggest that this comparatively less impactful activity is advantageous for people who experience joint soreness, but less may be less beneficial for people aiming to improve bone health.

In terms of energy use, walking and elliptical training are just about neck-and-neck: In one study, participants were asked to complete two 15-minute bouts of exercise, one on a treadmill, the other on an elliptical machine.4 In both exercises, they were told to maintain a pace that felt challenging, yet sustainable (or about a ‘4’ or ‘5’ on a 10-point intensity scale). During the course of each session, researchers looked at the participants’ energy consumption and found that it was the same no matter of which machine they happened to be using at the time. Intensity did matter, of course, but that was a factor controlled by the individual.

So, whether to walk or hit the elliptical may simply come down to what is most accessible and convenient. For clients with joint issues, the elliptical machine, with its less jarring movements, may be preferable. For those trying to bone health in part by the impact of the exercise, walking may hold a greater appeal.

And keep in mind that intensity is a major factor that can be varied in any exercise.

So if a brisk walk doesn’t seem as tiring as a session on the elliptical, maybe it’s time to pick up the pace, or to change the setting on the elliptical machine!

References:

1. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17805099
2. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20022994
3. http://bjsm.bmj.com/content/48/7/616.2.abstract?sid=627ceaeb-cccb-4ed3-97d0-1a385e4b3373
4. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20453685

The post Walking or the Elliptical Machine? appeared first on The NFPT Blog.

How to Prevent ACL Injuries and Keep Your Clients on the Court Through Corrective Exercise Programming

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries are one of the most common among young female athletes occurring at a conservative estimate of 38,000 incidences per year. (1) With the cost of a surgical repair ranging between $17,000-$25,000 (2), the economic impact is significant, not to mention the long term sequela to the athlete which includes a significantly greater risk of osteoarthritis in the future. (3) Approximately 80% of these injuries are non-contact, suggesting many of them can be prevented. (4)

The ACL is a ligament running from the posterior femur anteriorly to the tibia. It originates from deep within the notch of the distal femur and its proximal fibers fan out along the medial wall of the lateral femoral condyle. The ACL attaches in front of the intercondyloid eminence of the tibia and is blended with the anterior horn of the medial meniscus. It provides approximately 85% of the restraining forces preventing anterior tibial translation. It also limits excessive internal or external rotation of the tibia. (5)

Pubertal females are four to six time more likely to sustain an ACL injury compared to males, thereby representing the largest demographic of athletes at potential risk. (6) This is due to a variety of reasons including the rapid growth of the femur and tibia that generate larger joint forces making neuromuscular control of the lower extremities and trunk much harder. A lack of core stability has also been shown to influence knee injuries in female athletes as reported by Zazulak and colleagues. They demonstrated this decrease in core neuromuscular control increases uncontrolled trunk displacement leading to higher knee ligament strain and ACL injury. (7)

In order to identify at risk athletes, implementing a screening method such as the Landing Error Scoring System (LESS) test or Tuck Jump test is essential when working with all athletes in this age range. The LESS involves having the athlete stand on a 12-inch box and then jumping forward with both feet to a predetermined line followed by an immediate jump for maximal height.

The Tuck Jump test requires the athlete to perform repeated jumps flexing the knees toward the trunk for a duration of 10 seconds. Both tests have been validated in the literature to identify neuromuscular imbalances. (9) (10) (For more information on each test please refer to NASM Essentials of Corrective Exercise Training for a detailed review. (8))

One of the most common muscular imbalances identified in females over males is increased knee valgus and coronal plane rotation that has been shown to be a predictor of injury. This common finding has been associated with increased quadriceps firing and decreased gluteal activation in females, causing anterior shear stress on the tibia, which is then transferred to the ACL. (11)

In order to establish proper gluteus maximus activation, a hip bridge with a resistance band above the knees is recommended. Choi and colleagues found that gluteus maximus EMG activity was significantly greater while anterior pelvic tilt angle was significantly lower in the hip bridge with isometric hip abduction compared to the hip bridge without the band. Therefore, they concluded that performing hip bridges with isometric hip abduction against isometric elastic resistance can be used to increase gluteus maximus EMG activity and reduce anterior pelvic tilt during the exercise. (16)

Hip Bridge with Resistance Band – Begin by lying on the floor with knees bent and feet flat on the floor. Place a resistance band around the thighs just above the knees. Slightly abduct the legs while simultaneously performing a hip bridge. Slowly lower to start position without bringing knees together. Perform 3 sets of 10 repetitions.

Valgus collapse of the knee can also be associated with weakness of the hip external rotators and gluteus maximus. Paterno and colleagues identified this finding as an eight times greater risk of sustaining a second ACL injury. (12) Performing the clam shell exercise will mitigate hip rotator weakness, helping to minimize this potential risk.

Clam Shell with Resistance Band – Begin by lying on the side with knees together and bent to 90 degrees with resistance band around knees. Lift top knee upward while keeping feet touching. Continue lifting knee to the point just before pelvis begins to move. Perform 3 sets of 10 repetitions.

The hamstrings are also synergistic to the knee helping to stabilize the tibia against the anterior forces created by the quadriceps. A stability ball leg curl is a great open kinetic chain exercise and has been showed to elicit high EMG activity of the hamstring muscles while co-contracting the core musculature. (13)

Stability Ball Leg Curl – Begin lying face up with arms extended at sides and ankles on top of the stability ball. Activate core and form a bridge position. Then flex knees, bending legs as you draw the ball inward. Reverse the movement, extending knees, and return to start position. Perform 3 sets of 10 repetitions.

In order to establish lateral stability, the side step “monster walk” with knees bent is a functional and effective exercise. Increased hip abduction strength has been shown to improve the ability of female athletes to control lower extremity alignment. (14) When performing this exercise, the stepping motion should be performed in a squat position rather than an upright straight leg position in order to generate greater gluteus maximus and medius muscle activity. (15)

1/4 Squat with Lateral Steps Using Resistance Band – Begin standing with a resistance band around the thighs just above the knees. Keep your feet and knees apart enough to put resistance on the band. Perform a ¼ squat with both feet supporting body weight. Hold squat position, shift weight fully onto one leg. Take a lateral step with the other un-weighted leg. Repeat, taking several lateral steps in one direction and then doing the same in the other direction.

Another potential risk of injury occurs when landing with a knee flexion angle of less than 45 degrees. Therefore, performing long jumps can be used to train proper landing patterns. This exercise is similar to the Tuck Jump test with the addition of forward motion and is also a great way to introduce plyometric exercises. If the athlete is unable to “stick” the landing with toes straight ahead and no inward knee motion, then regress them to submaximal jumps of a shorter distance until perfect technique can be attainted. (6)

Long Jump to Backward Hop – Begin in quarter squat position. Jump forward in an explosive long jump trying to “stick” the landing for 3-5 seconds. Make sure the knees are flexed to approximately 90 degrees on landing. Hop backwards two or three times returning to the start position. Perform 3 sets of 10 repetitions.

One of the most significant findings, which has been shown to reduce the incidence of ACL injuries in a number of studies, is the incorporation of high-intensity plyometric exercises as part of the training program. The split jump offers these plyometric benefits.

Split Jumps – Begin in a split stance lunge position with arms raised at shoulder level. Jump upward and quickly reposition legs and land with feet in opposite positions. Raise arms while you are jumping. Continue jumps by alternating leg positions. Perform 3 sets of 10 repetitions.

If an athlete fatigues to the point that she can no longer perform the exercise perfectly, then she should be instructed to stop. The duration of each completed exercise should be noted with the goal of the next training session to continue to improve technique and to increase volume or intensity.

In addition to the NASM corrective exercise continuum of inhibit, lengthen, activate and integrate, three additional components should also be considered as part of a comprehensive training protocol. These are biomechanically correct movement patterns as noted above; neuromuscular patterning based on the identification of underlying neuromuscular imbalances as found in the assessment test; and constant biomechanical assessment through the LESS, Tuck Jump or similar test with feedback and verbal cueing to athlete both during and after training. (10)

An incorporation of a core stabilization program is not only integral but also essential in order to provide dynamic stability for the lower extremities. A weak core results in energy leakage as described by McGill requiring the weaker joints to make up for this difference. An example of this is when jumping or changing running direction, the lower extremity musculature must compensate for the lack of core stability, negatively effecting performance. (17)

All of the above displayed exercises are easy to execute and include minimal risks if performed as described. To achieve satisfying results, it is important do them on a regular basis and for a minimum of 4 weeks. The general guideline for progressing student athletes is the “10% rule”, where total training (intensity, frequency, duration, or any combination) is not increased more than 10% per week. Although there are many approaches to knee strengthening, hopefully this has provided insight into some basic strengthening strategies. Should your client’s condition worsen at any time, an evaluation with a medical professional would be warranted.

To download a copy of the above exercises, click here.

References

1) Toth AP, Cordasco FA. Anterior cruciate ligament injuries in the female athlete. J Gend Specif Med. 2001; 4:25–34.

2) de Loes, M, et al.  A 7-year study on risks and costs of knee injuries in male and female youth participants in 12 sports. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2000;10(2):90-97.

3) Ruiz AL, Kelly M, Nutton RW. Arthroscopic ACL reconstruction: a 5-9 year follow up. Knee. 2002;9(3):197-200.

4) Sadoghi, P, et al. 2012. Effectiveness of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury Prevention Training Programs. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012; 94:1-8.

5) Lowe, R. Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL). Retrieved from: http://www.physio-pedia.com/Anterior_Cruciate_Ligament_(ACL)

6) Myer, G. 2004. Rationale and Clinical Techniques for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury Prevention Among Female Athletes. Journal of Athletic Training 2004;39(4):352–364.

7) Zazulak BT, Hewett TE, Reeves NP, et al. The effects of core proprioception on knee injury: a prospective biomechanical–epidemiological study. Am J Sports Med 2007;35(3):368–73.

8) Clark, MA, Lucett, SC. (2014). NASM Essentials of Corrective Exercise Training. Burlington, MA. Jones & Bartlett Learning.

9) Padua, D. et al. 2011. Journal of Sport Rehabilitation. 20, 145-156.

10) Myer, et al. 2008. Tuck Jump Assessment for Reducing Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury Risk. Athl Ther Today. 2008 September 1; 13(5): 39–44.

11) Zazulak, B, et al. Gender Comparison of Hip Muscle Activity During Single-Leg Landing. Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy.

12) Paterno, M, et al. Biomechanical Measures During Landing and Postural Stability Predict Second Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction and Return to Sport. Am J Sports Med October 2010 vol. 38 no. 10 1968-1978.

13) Panagiotis, T., et al. 2015.
 Muscle and intensity based hamstring exercise classification in elite female track and field athletes: implications for exercise selection during rehabilitation. Open Access Journal of Sports Medicine. 6:209-217.

14) Myer
, G, et al. 2008. Trunk and Hip Control Neuromuscular Training for the Prevention of Knee Joint Injury. Clin Sports Med 27:425–448.

15) Berry, et al. 2015. Resisted side-stepping: the effect of posture on hip abductor muscle activation. Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy.

(16) Choi, C, et al. 2014. Isometric hip abduction using a Thera-band alters gluteus maximus muscle activity and the anterior pelvic tilt angle during bridging exercise. Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology.

(17) McGill, S. Core Training: Evidence Translating to Better Performance and Injury Prevention. Strength and Conditioning Journal. Vol 32(3):33-46.

(18) Myer, G. 2006. The effects of plyometric vs dynamic stabilization and balance training on power, balance, and landing force in female athletes. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 20(2), 345-353.

The post How to Prevent ACL Injuries and Keep Your Clients on the Court Through Corrective Exercise Programming appeared first on NASM Blog.