RESULTS & DISCUSSION REFERENCES An initial investigation into the influence of Sacroiliac belt application on groin injury related clinical measures Neil Light and Danielle Ritson University Of Chichester, West Sussex, UK METHODS CONCLUSION Five participants (age 25.4 ± 4.1 years, height 1.66 ± 0.10m, mass ± 12kg ) performed a series of tests with and without application of an S.I belt (Serola Biomechanics, USA). Hip movement peak torque and functional strength ratios (Add Concentric : Abd Eccentric) were measured by a Biodex Isokinetic machine (fig.1). Dynamic hip adduction during drop landing was analysed using a Vicon Motion Capture Systems (fig.3). Hip add tone was measure via bent knee fallout (BKFO) test (fig.4) and passive rotation range using hand-held goniometry. The Y-balance test was used to assess functional lower limb stability (fig.2). Table.1. Mean average strength (R & L) related measures with and without S.I belt application. No S.I BeltS.I BeltDifference Adductor Peak torque (Nm) 73.1 ± ± Abductor Peak torque (Nm) 54.9 ± ± Adductor : Abductor Functional Ratio (%) 75.2 ± ± Fig. 3. Vicon motion analysis Initial analysis showed S.I belt application improved both peak torque and functional strength ratio of adductor and abductor muscles. (Table.1). S.I belt application also reduced dynamic hip adduction upon drop landing m/s contact) and improved composite Y-balance scores (Table.2). Table.2. Mean dynamic valgus angles and composite Y-balance scores (R&L) with and without belt application. No S.I BeltS.I BeltDifference Dynamic hip add angle (>100 m/s) (°) ± ± Y-balance composite scores (cm) 92.5 ± ± Whilst analyses showed positive affect upon the strength and dynamic movement measures, both passive hip rotation range and BKFO measures were reduced with belt application (Table. 3). Table.3. Mean passive hip int & ext rotation ROM and BKFO measures (R & L) with and without belt application No S.I BeltS.I BeltDifference Hip Int ROM (°) 33.4 ± ± Hip Ext ROM (°) 38.0 ± ± Total Hip ROM (°) 71.4 ± ± BKFO (°) 16.6 ± ± Mens, J., Inklaar, H., Koes, B.W. and Stam, H.J. (2006). A new view on adduction- related groin pain. Clin J Sport Med, 16 (1): Mens, J.M.A., Damen,L., Snijders, C.J. and Stam, H.J Henk. (2006). Clinical Biomechanics, 21 (2): 122–127 Sawle, L., Freeman, J., Matthews, M. and Marsden, J. (2013). Managing the grumbling groin: a novel approach. Sport Ex medicine, 55: Fig. 4. Bent Knee Fall Out (BKFO) Fig. 1. Isokinetic testing Fig. 2. Y-balance test Sacroiliac belts: Useful in the management and prevention of Hip / Groin pain? Athletes often report increased “comfort” and “stability” wearing Sacroiliac (S.I) belts. Application has been shown to reduce pain and improve function in athletes with adductor related groin pain (Mens et al. 2006). The aim of this pilot study was to examine the influence of S.I belt application on clinical, biomechanical and functional measures, related to hip / groin injury risk factors. S.I belt application may provide structural compression, reducing passive hip joint range and associated myofascial tone. Interestingly, S.I belt application improved dynamic movement stability and hip muscle strength. The clinical effects of S.I belt application warrants further investigation.