English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Objectives: To compare trunk flexion and lateral flexion range of motion (ROM) pre-post intervention. To compare the bowling speed of Action Cricket fast bowlers pre-post intervention. To determine the correlation between change in bowling speed immediately post-intervention to change in trunk flexion and lateral flexion ROM immediately post-intervention. To determine the association between change in bowling speed immediately postintervention and the subjects' perception of change in bowling speed. Methods: Forty asymptomatic Action Cricket fast bowlers were divided into four groups of ten each. Group 1 received lumbar spine manipulation, Group 2 received thoracic spine manipulation, Group 3 received combined thoracic and lumbar spine manipulation and Group 4 received the sham laser intervention (placebo). Pre- and post-intervention trunk flexion and lateral flexion ROM and bowling speed were measured using a digital inclinometer and a SpeedTrac\x99 Speed Sport Radar. The subjects' perception of a change in bowling speed post-intervention was also recorded. SPSS version 15.0 was used to analyse the data. Twotailed tests were used in all cases. Results: Trunk flexion and lateral flexion increased significantly (p &lt; 0.05) post-spinal manipulation. There was a significant increase in bowling speed post-thoracic (p = 0.042) and postcombined manipulation (p &lt; 0.000). A significant yet weak positive correlation (p = 0.003; r = 0.451) was seen in change in bowling speed and change in thoracic flexion and lateral flexion. There was no significant difference in the percentage subjective change by intervention group (p = 0.217). Conclusions: Spinal manipulation is a valid intervention for short-term increase in bowling speed.

The immediate effect of lumbar spine manipulation, thoracic spine manipulation, combination lumbar and thoracic spine manipulation and sham laser on bowling speed in action cricket fast bowlers