Sex-dimorphic landing mechanics and their role within the noncontact ACL injury mechanism: evidence, limitations and directions

Table 5 Summary of studies investigating sex differences in hip adduction angles and moments during a vertical landing task

References	Population		Landing Task		Result†
	Category	Mean Age (years)	Double-Leg vs. Single Leg	Height (cm)	at IC	peak	RoM
Hip Adduction Angle
Wallace et al. [43]	Adult-Athlete	21.6	Double	maximum vertical jump height	---	+	---
Earl et al. [23]	Adult	22.8	Double	31	---	+	---
Kernozek et al. [32]	Adult	24.1	Double	60	0	0	0
Pappas et al. [37]	Adult	28.5	Double & Single	40	---	0^b	---
Lephart et al. [34]	Adult-Athlete	20.3	Single	20	---	0	---
Orishimo et al. [36]	Adult-Athlete	26.3	Single	30	0	0^a	0
Kernozek et al. [10]	Adult	23.4	Single	50	---	0	---
TOTAL*				% (-/+/0)	0/0/100	0/29/71	0/0/100
Hip Adduction Moment
Chaudhari et al. [9]	Adult	19.9	Double	30.48	---	0	---
Kernozek et al. [32]	Adult	24.1	Double	60	---	0	---
Orishimo et al. [36]	Adult-Athlete	26.3	Single	30	0	0	---
TOTAL*				% (-/+/0)	0/0/100	0/0/100	---

† +: greater value in female subjects; -: smaller value in female subjects; 0: no differences between sexes; ---: not investigated
^a hip adduction angle at peak knee flexion angle
^b hip adduction angle at 40° knee flexion angle
* Percentage of studies having found lower (-), greater (+), and similar (0) values in female subjects in comparison with male subjects
IC: initial ground contact; RoM: range of motion

ISSN: 2052-1847