SUPPORT FOR MOVEMENT RETRAINING: TIME UNDER ATTENTION CHANGES MOVEMENT PATTERNS
11th January 2019
Missing the movement of risk:
The Performance Matrix (TPM) is a multi-joint, multi-intensity battery of cognitive movement control tests. In addition to being comprehensively described within the literature (Dingenen et al., 2018; Mischiati et al., 2015; Mottram & Comerford, 2008), the clinicians using the system on a daily basis state that TPM ‘makes sure I don’t miss something’ when assessing their individuals’ movement abilities. Ensuring all bases are covered with respect to assessment, the TPM system produces a detailed breakdown of each site (for example, the hip) and direction (for example, flexion) at which injury risk or performance deficits may be linked.
Changing movement behaviours:
Once issues are identified, there is still the need for intervention. Fundamental to the success of TPM’s risk analysis and reporting system is its ability to direct movement retraining to address any individual’s specific problem. Recent literature offers support for the movement retraining principles delivered within TPM’s education route, The Performance Solution. In 2013, Worsley and colleagues employed 2 minutes, twice a day protocol of cognitive movement retraining. This intervention positively influenced shoulder pain symptoms, related muscle activation and kinematics. This same ‘time under attention’ protocol is also seen to elicit change in movement behaviour in other regions. Wilson and colleagues (2018) identified implementing a 2-minute time under attention, twice a day retraining as changing joint kinematics at the pelvis and hip when 3D motion analysis pre and post intervention data was analysed.
As increasing amounts of literature continue to explore the importance of the assessment and management of both joint coordination (Davies 2019; Hug & Tucker, 2017; Needham et al., 2016) and muscle synergies (Avrillon et al., 2018; Crouzier et al., 2018; Liew et al., 2018) to support performance and reduce injury risk, 2019 is likely to see ever more support for the principles underpinning TPM.
Want to book your free TPM demo? Email us at firstname.lastname@example.org
· Avrillon, S., Guilhem, G., Barthelemy, A., & Hug, F. (2018). Coordination of hamstrings is individual-specific and is related to motor performance. Journal of Applied Physiology.
· Crouzier, M., Hug, F., Dorel, S., Deschamps, T., Tucker, K., & Lacourpaille, L. (2018). Do individual differences in the distribution of activation between synergist muscles reflect individual strategies? Experimental brain research, 1-11.
· Davis, K., Williams, J. L., Sanford, B. A., & Zucker-Levin, A. (2019). Assessing lower extremity coordination and coordination variability in individuals with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction during walking. Gait & posture, 67, 154-159.
· Hug, F., & Tucker, K. (2017). Muscle coordination and the development of musculoskeletal disorders. Exercise and sport sciences reviews, 45(4), 201-208.
· Liew, B. X., Del Vecchio, A., & Falla, D. (2018). The influence of musculoskeletal pain disorders on muscle synergies—A systematic review. PloS one, 13(11), e0206885.
· Needham, R., Naemi, R., & Chockalingam, N. (2014). Quantifying lumbar–pelvis coordination during gait using a modified vector coding technique. Journal of biomechanics, 47(5), 1020-1026.