Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Background:

Elite wrestling is a contact sport characterized by high levels of physical fitness and a high level of injury. Studies have shown that poor “core stability” is associated with increased risk of injury in other sports. This study examines the correlation between the different parameters of “core stability” and the injury rate in elite wrestling.

Hypothesis:

It was hypothesized that poor results on core stability tests would be associated with an increased risk of injury.

Study Design:

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2.

Methods:

We involved 60 members of the Azerbaijan National Wrestling Team (mean age 25.5 ± 4.6 years) who met the predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Baseline assessment of core stability was performed using the Limits of Stability Test on the Biodex Balance System, McGill's Endurance Test Battery, and complex core stability tests. Injuries were defined as tissue damage resulting from sports participation that led to at least 1 day of time loss from training or competition. Data were collected over a 6-month period. Descriptive statistics, including interquartile ranges, were recorded, and Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated to assess relationships between variables.

Results:

A total of 997 injuries were recorded over 6 months (median injury burden: 54.6 days/1000 training hours; median days lost per injury: 16.5 [IQR, 14.0-19.8]). Core stability measures demonstrated significant negative correlations with multiple injury parameters, indicating that better stability performance was associated with reduced injury risk and severity. The McGill Side Bridge (right) test showed the strongest association with injury burden (r = −0.596, P < .001) and days out of training (r = −0.597, P < .001). The dynamic overall score was also highly correlated with injury burden (r = −0.530, P < .001) and injury incidence (r = −0.472, P < .001). Across all injury outcomes, days out of training demonstrated the greatest number of significant correlations, ranging from r = −0.412 to r = −0.597 (all P < .05).

Conclusion:

Our study demonstrates that there is a significant relationship between poor core stability parameters and injury burden. These results could suggest that a specially designed core-specific training program could help reduce injury rates in wrestling, provided that a controlled study—featuring core exercises administered to an experimental group—confirms the link between weak core stability and an increased risk of injury.

Keywords

core stability core core muscles wrestling injury rate McGill tests Biodex Balance System

Wrestling is a popular sport, currently with 254,318 athlete participants in the United States alone.¹ In 708 BCE, wrestling was included among the main Olympic disciplines.⁷ Modern wrestling includes freestyle and Greco-Roman style.⁷

Chaabene et al⁷ state that high levels of aerobic and anaerobic power, strength, and explosive power, as well as strong neck muscles, are necessary for success in wrestling. The injury rate in elite wrestling published by Park et al²⁵ in Korea was 4.65 per 1000 training hours. Park et al²⁵ recorded that most injuries occur in the lower extremities (37.5%), followed by the upper extremities (27.4%), trunk (25.4%), and neck and head area (9.7%). Bernardo et al⁴ found that the lower extremities account for 61%, the upper extremities for 29%, and the trunk for 10% of all wrestling injuries. Thomas and Zamanpour³¹ reviewed the literature on various aspects of injuries in wrestling and concluded that most research in this area is incomplete and inconsistent, making comparison and meta-analysis of results difficult. Despite these reservations, they deduced the average injury rate to be 16.3 per 1000 athletic encounters (AEs) in competitions and 69.5 per 1000 AEs in training. An AE is 1 walk to the carpet (1-12 minutes) in competition or 1 workout (20 minutes to 2 hours) in training. According to their data, injuries to the upper extremities account for 26% in competitions and 24% in training; the proportion of injuries is 15% and 12% to the trunk, 31% and 20% to the neck and head, and 24% and 39% to the lower extremities, respectively. Fractures account for 6% and 7%; dislocations, 6% and 6%; ligament and cartilage damage, 12% and 17%; contusions, 25% and 5.7%; dissections, bruises, and abrasions, 23% and 4%; and sprains and muscle tears, 38% and 26%.³¹

The concept of “core stability” remains controversial. Some sources define “core stability” in terms of anatomy, while others define it as a combination of function and anatomy.⁸ Figure 1 is a modified schematic illustration from McGill of the structures included in the “core.”²³ Anatomically, the “core” is a collection of musculoskeletal structures and ligaments of the lumbar spine and pelvis. These structures are responsible not only for stabilizing the spine and pelvis but also for transferring energy between the lower and upper extremities, which is very important in many sports.³² Some authors additionally refer to “core” as all muscles between the sternum and the knee.¹⁷

Figure 1.

Schematic demonstrating anatomic structures included in “mechanical core stability.”²³ The rigidity and stability of the spine are ensured by the multilevel interaction of rigid structures around the spine (A). P represents external load. Rigid structures that make up the body wall (B). Adapted with permission from Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.: McGill SM. Low back stability: From formal description to issues for performance and rehabilitation. Exerc Sport Sci Rev. 2001;29(1):26-31.

“Core strength” is defined as the ability of the “core” muscles to generate and transfer the force.¹²“Core strength” is also defined as the potential of the “core” muscles to counteract the effects of external forces.¹⁶“Core endurance” is defined as the ability of the “core” muscles to maintain a certain position for a long time or perform multiple repetitions.²⁸“Core stability” is the ability to maintain balance and control passive and active stabilizers in the lumbo-pelvic region, ensuring the correct position of the trunk and hips during static and dynamic movements. “Core stability” can also be considered as maintaining control over the “core” during strength exercises or in response to any posture disorder.²⁷

A body of work shows a link between the level of core stability and the injury rate in various sports. In a review paper, De Blaiser et al¹⁰ showed that deficiencies in the development of core strength, core endurance, balance, and neuromuscular control in athletes increase the risk of injury. They suggest that when screening an athlete, measurement of core parameters should always be included to assess the risk of injury. The findings of the systematic review by Emami et al¹³ are consistent with this, showing a link between weak core stability and an increased risk of injury, based on an investigation involving athletes from 10 different sports. The results from Schuermans et al,²⁹ who used electromyography, show that less activation of the trunk and gluteal muscles in hockey players is associated with a high risk of injury to the biceps femoris muscle. They conclude that injury prevention should focus on the development of these core muscles and also balance training to improve core stability.²⁹

A number of studies found a connection between weak core stability and upper extremity injuries. Pogetti et al,²⁶ using the “lateral flexion endurance” test in athletes participating in handball, baseball, and softball—sports that require a wide range of throwing motions—identified a link between shoulder injuries and reduced core stability.

Many researchers consider core endurance more important for athletes than core stability.^18,20,32 In light of this, McGill²³ stated that developing core endurance should be prioritized over core strength development for injury prevention and rehabilitation. Leetun et al,²¹ however, showed that in an investigation involving athletes from basketball and track sports, the main predictor of back and lower extremity injuries was the strength of the hip external rotators. In their opinion, for elite athletes, strength during high-speed movement better stabilizes the core; therefore, strength is more important than core endurance.²¹ They also suggest that other core stability parameters, such as motor control, may be equally important. Hewett et al¹⁹ also showed that balance exercises improved control of the knee when landing after a jump.

Despite numerous investigations confirming a link between core stability parameters and injury risk in various sports, current evidence evaluating this association in wrestling remains very limited. This study aimed to address this gap by examining the relationship between the results of multiple tests—each reflecting different components of core stability—and injury-related parameters. We hypothesized that poorer core stability test performance would be associated with an increased risk of injury.

Methods

Study Design and Participants

The participants were a convenience sample from the national wrestling squad. Initially, the participants underwent the Biodex Balance System test, McGill's endurance tests, and complex core stability tests. In the 6 months after testing, injury data were collected using the “ORCHARD” system.²⁴ For the purposes of this study, injury was defined as an athlete missing at least 1 training session because of the recorded injury. Injury counting was done in accordance with the recommendations given in the International Olympic Committee Consensus Statement.³

To determine the presence and degree of correlation between various parameters of core stability and the level of injury among elite-level wrestlers, the Limits of Stability Test on the Biodex Balance System was chosen to assess motor control as a parameter of core stability,⁹ the McGill endurance test battery to assess core endurance,³³ and the complex core stability tests to assess core functional capacity.²²

The inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) a member of the national wrestling team for at least 6 months and (2) age between 18 and 30 years. The exclusion criteria were the following: (1) any acute or unhealed injury at initial screening, (2) any injury incompatible with a sports career that occurred during follow-up, (3) surgical interventions during follow-up, and (4) exclusion from the national team during follow-up. A total of 60 athletes completed all the requirements, and their results were selected for data analysis by the end of the study. This study was approved by the institutional review board of the Azerbaijan Sports Academy (STUDY 3-19-14), and consent for the study was obtained from all included participants.

Variables

A detailed description of the tests is given in Table 1, and a description of injury parameters is given in Table 2. Tests were performed by qualified physiotherapists with at least 3 years’ experience in the relevant field and members of the Sports Medicine Research Laboratory of the Azerbaijan Sports Academy.

Table 1

Description of All Given Tests

Test	Unit	Description
McGill endurance tests²		Core endurance tests
McGill test (plank)	Time (seconds)	Holding time at flexion
McGill test (extension)	Time (seconds)	Holding time at extension
McGill test (side bridge left)	Time (seconds)	Holding time at left bridge position
McGill test (side bridge right)	Time (seconds)	Holding time at right bridge position
Core stability tests²²		Core functional tests
Core stability ventral	Time (seconds)	Holding time at exercising at flexion
Core stability dorsal	Time (seconds)	Holding time at exercising at extension
Core stability left	Time (seconds)	Holding time at exercising at left bridge position
Core stability right	Time (seconds)	Holding time at exercising at right bridge position
Limits of Stability Test⁵		Balance test, performed on the Biodex Balance System device
Static overall	Score (number)	Overall score on all directions in static mode (platform surface is stable)
Dynamic overall	Score (number)	Overall score on all directions in dynamic mode (platform surface is unstable)

Table 2

Description of Injury Parameters

Injury Parameter	Description
Days out of training	Days missed because of total injuries
Days out because of upper extremity	Days missed because of upper limb injuries
Days out because of lower extremity	Days missed because of lower limb injuries
Days out because of trunk	Days missed because of trunk injuries
Days out because of competition	Days missed because of injury, happening during competition
Days out because of training	Days missed because of injury, happening during training
Events	Number of injuries
Individual injury rate (incidence)	Individual (1 athlete’s) number of injuries/1000 training hours
Individual injury rate by severity (injury burden)	Individual (1 athlete’s) number of missing days/1000 training hours

Injury Rate

This article follows advice from the International Olympic Committee consensus paper on recording and reporting injury and illness data in sport.³ Time loss, injury rates, and proportions were defined, based on recommendations given by consensus.³ The Orchard Sports Injury Classification System was used to collect injury data.²⁴ Injury data were collected by the sport federation's team of medical doctors employed on a permanent basis.

Statistics

Statistical analysis of the research results was performed using IBM SPSS.²⁶ In descriptive statistics, the median and interquartile range were used to reflect the differences. To establish correlations, the Pearson coefficient was calculated. The results were considered statistically significant at P < .05.

Results

This study investigated data from 60 male members of the Azerbaijan National Wrestling Team, representing both freestyle and Greco-Roman styles (mean age: 25.5 ± 4.6 years; height: 174.4 ± 9.0 cm; weight: 84.5 ± 19.3 kg; body fat percentage: 15.3% ± 3.9%). At baseline, there was a balanced distribution of athletes across official weight categories and wrestling styles, with equal representation of freestyle and Greco-Roman wrestlers (30:30).

A total of 997 injuries were recorded over the 6-month observation period. The median injury burden was 54.6 days per 1000 training hours, and the median number of days lost per injury was 16.5 (IQR, 14.0-19.8). Injuries to the lower extremities accounted for 28.4% of all cases, the upper extremities for 39%, and the trunk and neck for 32.5%.

The distribution of injury types differed between training and competition. Ligament and cartilage injuries accounted for 64% during training and 53% during competition. Muscle tears were reported in 31% and 36% of cases, respectively. Contusions occurred in 1.5% (training) and 4% (competition), while skin lacerations were documented in 3.4% (training) and 17% (competition).

Across all injury parameters, core stability scores demonstrated significant negative correlations, indicating that better performance was consistently associated with reduced injury risk, severity, and recovery time (Table 3).

Table 3

Correlations Between Injury and Core Stability Parameters^a

Injury Parameter	Test	r	P Value
Days out of training	McGill test (side bridge right)	−0.597	<.001
	McGill test (plank)	−0.448	.010
	McGill test (extension)	−0.490	.004
	McGill test (side bridge left)	−0.533	.002
	Core stability ventral	−0.502	.003
	Core stability dorsal	−0.440	.012
	Core stability left	−0.412	.019
	Dynamic overall	−0.513	.002
Days out because of upper extremity	McGill test (side bridge left)	−0.389	.028
	Core stability ventral	−0.442	.011
	Dynamic overall	−0.563	.001
Days out because of trunk	McGill test (plank)	−0.512	.021
Days out because of competition	McGill test (side bridge right)	−0.468	.007
	McGill test (plank)	−0.377	.034
	McGill test (extension)	−0.349	.050
	McGill test (side bridge left)	−0.380	.032
	Core stability ventral	−0.385	.030
	Core stability dorsal	−0.385	.030
	Dynamic overall	−0.394	.026
Events	McGill test (extension)	−0.364	.041
	McGill test (side bridge left)	−0.380	.032
	Core stability ventral	−0.365	.040
	Dynamic overall	−0.389	.028
Individual injury rate—events/1000 training hours (incidence)	McGill test (side bridge right)	−0.293	.019
	McGill test (plank)	−0.279	.026
	McGill test (extension)	−0.357	.004
	McGill test (side bridge left)	−0.366	.003
	Core stability ventral	−0.398	.001
	Core stability dorsal	−0.218	.084
	Core stability left	−0.236	.060
	Dynamic overall	−0.472	<.001
Individual injury rate by severity—missing days/1000 training hours (injury burden)	McGill test (side bridge right)	−0.596	<.001
	McGill test (plank)	−0.436	<.001
	McGill test (extension)	−0.484	<.001
	McGill test (side bridge left)	−0.528	<.001
	Core stability ventral	−0.499	<.001
	Core stability dorsal	−0.425	<.001
	Core stability left	−0.399	.001
	Dynamic overall	−0.530	<.001

The McGill side bridge (right) test showed the strongest individual associations with the following: injury burden (r = −0.596, P < .001), days out of training (r = −0.597, P < .001), injury incidence (r = −0.293, P = .019), and missed competition days (r = −0.468, P = .007). The dynamic overall score was also strongly correlated with injury burden (r = −0.530, P < .001), days out of training (r = −0.513, P = .002), and injury incidence (r = −0.472, P < .001).

Among all injury outcomes, days out of training showed the highest number of statistically significant correlations across 8 core stability tests, ranging from r = −0.412 (core stability left) to r = −0.597 (McGill side bridge right). Similarly, injury burden demonstrated moderate to strong associations with McGill plank (r = −0.436), McGill extension (r = −0.484), and core stability ventral (r = −0.499), all with P < .001.

The McGill test parameters showed statistically significant negative correlations with all injury-related variables assessed. Likewise, the core stability ventral and dynamic overall scores were significantly associated with all injury outcomes, except for days lost due to trunk injury.

Figure 2 shows the relationship between McGill side bridge right performance and both injury burden and days out of training.

Figure 2.

The correlation between injury rate parameters and the McGill side bridge test.

The median value of individual injury rate by severity (injury burden) was 54.6 (46.0-65.3). The median value for days out of training was 16.5 (14.0-19.8). Meanwhile, the median score on the McGill side bridge test was 117.5 (103.3-139).

Figure 3 illustrates similar findings for the dynamic overall score.

Figure 3.

The correlation between injury rate parameters and dynamic overall test result. The dynamic overall score in the study group had a median level of 12.5 (10.3-13.8) and statistically significantly correlated with the injury burden parameter (r = −0.530, P < .001) and days out of training (r = −0.513, P = .002).

Discussion

The major findings from our study demonstrate a consistent and statistically significant association between core stability performance and injury-related outcomes in elite wrestlers. Most notably, injury burden (measured as missing days per 1000 training hours) showed strong negative correlations with nearly all core stability measures. The McGill side bridge (right) test had the strongest association (r = −0.596, P < .001), followed by the dynamic overall score (r = −0.530, P < .001) and the McGill side bridge (left) test (r = −0.528, P < .001). Similarly, days lost from training were significantly correlated with dynamic overall (r = −0.513, P = .002) and core stability ventral tests (r = −0.502, P = .003). In addition, the individual injury incidence rate (events/1000 hours) showed moderate but significant inverse correlations with dynamic overall (r = −0.472, P < .001), McGill side bridge (left) (r = −0.366, P = .003), and core stability ventral (r = −0.398, P = .001) tests. These findings highlight that the side bridge (right and left), dynamic overall, and core stability ventral tests are the most relevant core stability measures associated with injury risk and burden. According to available information, this study is the first to show a correlation between core stability and the risk of injury in wrestlers.

The results indicate inverse correlations between core stability parameters and injury in this group of wrestlers. To minimize the likelihood of a type I error, the strength of correlation was considered strong only for the relationship between injury burden and core stability test results (P < .001); other correlations were interpreted as statistically significant.

The most significant tests associating core stability with injury are the McGill test scores, which correlate significantly with all injury rates except the “days missing because of trunk injuries” parameter. Next, we have the core stability ventral and dynamic overall “core stability” parameters, which correlate with 6 of 8 injury parameters.

The results show that, in general, there is a strong correlation between poor core stability and an increased risk of being severely injured. Although the number of injuries did not have a strong correlation with core stability, the number of days missed, reflecting the severity of the injuries, has a strong correlation with core stability. The correlation between the McGill side bridge test and the injury rate is in good agreement with the findings of Tate et al³⁰ and Pogetti et al²⁶ on the effect of reduced scores in this test on the likelihood of shoulder injuries.

Some researchers believe that tests combining various types of loading, such as isometric contractions of the “core” muscles with strength or isometric contractions with dynamic ones, are more informative since they better correspond to household and sports loads.¹⁴ Our results show that complex core stability tests also have a strong correlation with injury rates, especially the “ventral” test, which is holding a plank position in combination with lifting alternately straightened legs with a change of position every 10 seconds. A possible explanation is that, in wrestling and many other sports, athletes often use static contraction of the core muscles to facilitate dynamic work with the limbs.

Our results also show that the ability to maintain balance is associated with a decreased risk of injury. These findings are supported by Carrasco-Huenulef et al,⁶ who showed the effect of neuromuscular control on the risk of injury to the anterior cruciate ligament in basketball players. This is also supported by a study by Zazulak et al³⁴ on the effect of balance on the risk of acquiring a knee injury. According to their result, collegiate athletes with decreased neuromuscular control of the core, especially with impaired response to lateral displacement after a sudden force release, are at increased risk of knee ligament injuries.

Interestingly, while some studies show that there is no direct relationship between the various core stability parameters (eg, high values in endurance tests can be combined with low values in functional tests),^15,21 results of this study show the presence of a statistically significant correlation of almost all core stability parameters with injury parameters in wrestlers.

The individual injury rate by severity, “injury burden,” defined as missing days per 1000 training hours (mean, 54.91 ± 14.33), was also used for this study. According to Delfino Barboza et al,¹¹ when conducting a study on sports injuries, the risk and severity of injuries should be taken into account in the evaluation. Some authors use an injury risk parameter expressed as the number of injuries per 1000 hours of training, but this does not reflect the nature and severity of injuries. Others use the number of missed training days over a month, year, or season but do not take into account the number of training sessions conducted during this period. By using a “injury burden” parameter, we tried to increase the information content, considering both the time during which an athlete is at risk of injury and the severity of the injury, expressed as the number of days missed.³

Limitations

Our study is not without limitations. Professional athletes undergo various training cycles, including sport-specific training, strength training, endurance training, sparring, and speed development. Different training patterns have different loads and durations, resulting in varying injury risks overall and in the distribution of injuries by type and location. Future studies should include detailed training data (eg, type and duration of training) when collecting injury statistics. Nevertheless, it should be noted that in our case, the athletes of the national team involved in this study trained under almost identical conditions, meaning they were equally exposed to variations in injury risk caused by changes in training load. Therefore, the influence of this limitation on our results is likely less significant. The current study was restricted to a 6-month follow-up due to the active season, during which athletes were under continuous medical surveillance and participated in centralized camps with standardized training. This limited duration is another potential limitation, possibly affecting the reliability of the long-term data. Injury data were collected using time loss as the measure of injury severity, as it is the most commonly used method in sports medicine for quantifying injury severity. However, it has its own limitations—sometimes it is difficult to clearly distinguish between true time loss and a return to normal training. Athletes may return to full participation before the injury has fully resolved or complete healing has been achieved, often modifying their technique or performing at suboptimal levels—particularly when under pressure from coaching staff. Another limitation is the possible influence of other unidentified factors related to core stability, which we were unable to assess in this study.

Conclusion

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The authors express sincere gratitude to the staff of the Sports Medicine Research Laboratory for their valuable assistance with the testing procedures. Special thanks are extended to Zarifa Kamilova for her help in coordinating the work of the investigators and to the Azerbaijan Sports Academy for their support and facilitation of the study.

Final revision submitted August 25, 2025; accepted September 18, 2025.

The authors have declared that there are no conflicts of interest in the authorship and publication of this contribution. AOSSM checks author disclosures against the Open Payments Database (OPD). AOSSM has not conducted an independent investigation on the OPD and disclaims any liability or responsibility relating thereto.

Ethical approval for this study was obtained from the Azerbaijan Sports Academy (STUDY 3-19-14/).

References

Abbott

USA Wrestling sets new total membership record and surpasses 300,000 members for the first time. March 15, 2024. https://www.themat.com/news/2024/march/15/usa-wrestling-sets-new-total-membership-record-and-surpasses-300-000-members-for-the-first-time

Abdelraouf

Abdel-Aziem

AA.

The relationship between core endurance and back dysfunction in collegiate male athletes with and without nonspecific low back pain. Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2016;11(3):337-344.

Bahr

Clarsen

Derman

, et al. International Olympic Committee consensus statement: methods for recording and reporting of epidemiological data on injury and illness in sports 2020 (including the STROBE Extension for Sports Injury and Illness Surveillance (STROBE-SIIS)). Orthop J Sports Med. 2020;8(2):2325967120902908. doi:10.1177/2325967120902908

Barroso

Silva

Garcia

, et al. Musculoskeletal injuries in wrestling athletes. Acta Ortop Brasil. 2011;19:98-101. doi:10.1590/S1413-78522011000200007

Biodex Medical Systems I. Balance System SD: Operation and Service Manual. Biodex Medical Systems; 2008.

Carrasco-Huenulef

Poblete-Garrido

Monrroy Uarac

Ramirez-Campillo

Moran

Burgos

Effects of a neuromuscular training program on anterior cruciate ligament injury risk factors in youth female basketball players: a pilot study. Gazzetta Med Ital. 2019;178:137-44. doi:10.23736/S0393-3660.18.03731-2

Chaabene

Negra

Bouguezzi

, et al. Physical and physiological attributes of wrestlers: an update. J Strength Cond Res. 2017;31(5):1411-1442. doi:10.1519/jsc.0000000000001738

Clark

Lambert

Hunter

AM.

Contemporary perspectives of core stability training for dynamic athletic performance: a survey of athletes, coaches, sports science and sports medicine practitioners. Sports Med Open. 2018;4(1):32. doi:10.1186/s40798-018-0150-3

Dawson

Dzurino

Karleskint

Tucker

Examining the reliability, correlation, and validity of commonly used assessment tools to measure balance. Health Sci Rep. 2018;1(12):e98. doi:10.1002/hsr2.98

10.

De Blaiser

Roosen

Willems

Danneels

Bossche

De Ridder

Is core stability a risk factor for lower extremity injuries in an athletic population? A systematic review. Phys Ther Sport. 2018;30:48-56. doi:10.1016/j.ptsp.2017.08.076

11.

Delfino Barboza

Rössler

Verhagen

. Considerations and interpretation of sports injury prevention studies. Clin Sports Med. 2018;37(3):413-425. doi:10.1016/j.csm.2018.03.006

12.

Dominguez

Gajda

RS.

Total Body Training. Scribner; 1982.

13.

Emami

Bandpei

MAM

Rahmani

Biglarian

Taghipour

Association between trunk muscles characteristics with lower limb injuries: a systematic review. Phys Ther Sport. 2018;32:301-307. doi:10.1016/j.ptsp.2018.04.013

14.

Etxaleku

Izquierdo

Bikandi

, et al. Validation and application of two new core stability tests in professional football. Appl Sci. 2020;10(16):5495. doi:10.3390/app10165495

15.

Fallahasady

Rahmanloo

Seidi

Rajabi

Bayattork

The relationship between core muscle endurance and functional movement screen scores in females with lumbar hyperlordosis: a cross-sectional study. BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil. 2022;14(1):182. doi:10.1186/s13102-022-00567-2

16.

Faries

Greenwood

Core training: stabilizing the confusion. Strength Cond J. 2007;29(2):10-25.

17.

Fig

Strength training for swimmers: training the core. Strength Cond J. 2005;27(2):40-42.

18.

Freeman

Karpowicz

Gray

McGill

Quantifying muscle patterns and spine load during various forms of the push-up. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2006;38(3):570-577. doi:10.1249/01.mss.0000189317.08635.1b

19.

Hewett

Lindenfeld

Riccobene

Noyes

FR.

The effect of neuromuscular training on the incidence of knee injury in female athletes. A prospective study. Am J Sports Med. 1999;27(6):699-706. doi:10.1177/03635465990270060301

20.

Kulas

Hortobágyi

DeVita

Trunk position modulates anterior cruciate ligament forces and strains during a single-leg squat. Clin Biomech (Bristol). 2012;27(1):16-21. doi:10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2011.07.009

21.

Leetun

Ireland

Willson

Ballantyne

Davis

IM.

Core stability measures as risk factors for lower extremity injury in athletes. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2004;36(6):926-934. doi:10.1249/01.mss.0000128145.75199.c3

22.

Maier

Gross

Trösch

, et al. Manual Leistungsdiagnostik. Swiss Olympic; 2016.

23.

McGill

SM.

Low back stability: from formal description to issues for performance and rehabilitation. Exerc Sport Sci Rev. 2001;29(1):26-31. doi:10.1097/00003677-200101000-00006

24.

Orchard

Meeuwisse

Derman

, et al. Sport Medicine Diagnostic Coding System (SMDCS) and the Orchard Sports Injury and Illness Classification System (OSIICS): revised 2020 consensus versions. Br J Sports Med. 2020;54(7):397-401. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2019-101921

25.

Park

Lee

Kim

HC.

Injuries in male and female elite Korean wrestling athletes: a 10-year epidemiological study. Br J Sports Med. 2019;53(7):430-435. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2018-099644

26.

Pogetti

Nakagawa

Contecote

Camargo

PR.

Core stability, shoulder peak torque and function in throwing athletes with and without shoulder pain. Phys Ther Sport. 2018;34:36-42. doi:10.1016/j.ptsp.2018.08.008

27.

Reed

Ford

Myer

Hewett

TE.

The effects of isolated and integrated ‘core stability’ training on athletic performance measures: a systematic review. Sports Med. 2012;42(8):697-706.

28.

Saeterbakken

Fimland

Navarsete

Kroken

Tillaar

Muscle activity, and the association between core strength, core endurance and core stability. J Novel Physiother Phys Rehabil. 2015;2:55-61. doi:10.17352/2455-5487.000022

29.

Schuermans

Danneels

Van Tiggelen

Palmans

Witvrouw

Proximal neuromuscular control protects against hamstring injuries in male soccer players: a prospective study with electromyography time-series analysis during maximal sprinting. Am J Sports Med. 2017;45(6):1315-1325. doi:10.1177/0363546516687750

30.

Tate

Turner

Knab

Jorgensen

Strittmatter

Michener

LA.

Risk factors associated with shoulder pain and disability across the lifespan of competitive swimmers. J Athl Train. 2012;47(2):149-58. doi:10.4085/1062-6050-47.2.149

31.

Thomas

Zamanpour

Injuries in wrestling: systematic review. Phys Sportsmed. 2018;46(2):168-196. doi:10.1080/00913847.2018.1445406

32.

Tse

McManus

Masters

RS.

Development and validation of a core endurance intervention program: implications for performance in college-age rowers. J Strength Cond Res. 2005;19(3):547-552. doi:10.1519/15424.1

33.

Waldhelm

Endurance tests are the most reliable core stability related measurements. J Sport Health Sci. 2012;1(2):121-128. doi:10.1016/j.jshs.2012.07.007

34.

Zazulak

Hewett

Reeves

Goldberg

Cholewicki

Deficits in neuromuscular control of the trunk predict knee injury risk—a prospective biomechanical-epidemiologic study. Am J Sports Med. 2007;35(7):1123-1130. doi:10.1177/0363546507301585

Correlation Between Core Stability Parameters and Injury Rate in Elite-Level Wrestling Sport: Results of 6-Month Follow-up

Abstract

Background:

Hypothesis:

Study Design:

Methods:

Results:

Conclusion:

Keywords

Methods

Study Design and Participants

Variables

Injury Rate

Statistics

Results

Discussion

Limitations

Conclusion

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

References