In conclusion, although it appears that age may be a primary risk factor, careful analysis of potential confounding variables such as flexibility and body weight could provide new insights around this important topic.FLEXIBILITY AND STRENGTH Associations with strength and flexibility and risk for hamstring injury have been conflicting.
Moreover, the vast majority of clinical tests used to date in the published studies are measures of static flexibility.
The relationship of static flexibility to active muscle contraction and injury particularly for muscles that cross more than one joint such as the hamstrings may be less than previously claimed.
In fact, one study comparing functional rehab and core strengthening to traditional measures of hamstring strengthening and stretching showed that the former strategy was much more effective at secondary hamstring injury reduction.
However, the role of core strengthening and stability in primary hamstring injury prevention remains unknown at this point.
The literature is varied on this idea; in fact, most studies of pre-season strength measurement (typically hamstring peak torque) have not shown differences between injured and non-injured athletes.
Theoretically this may make some sense if we consider that the hamstrings act eccentrically to decelerate the lower limb during the swing phase of running.
Muscle strain injuries are common in sports that involve high-intensity sprinting efforts such as the various forms of football and track and field.
Acute hamstring injuries occur particularly often with a recurrence rate approaching 30% (within the same season) in Australian Rules football.
These intriguing observations support the notion that the hamstrings probably should not be viewed in isolation of surrounding ipsilateral, and perhaps even contralateral, muscle groups.
Traditional thinking has been that mus-cle (hamstring and quadriceps) strength may be a predictor of risk for hamstring strains.