Bone adaptation to competitive collegiate-level cheer
Young, Kaelin C.
Walton, Nicholas G.
Kendall, Kristina L.
Patterson, Jeremy A.
Rogers, Michael E.
MetadataShow full item record
Young, Kaelin C.; Roberts, Devin; Walton, Nick G.; Kendall, Kristina L.; Patterson, Jeremy A.; Rogers, Michael E. 2014. Bone adaptation to competitive collegiate-level cheer. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, vol. 46:no. 5:pp 38-38
Although not officially recognized by the NCAA as a sport, collegiate cheerleading has become extremely competitive over the last decade, requiring a high-level of physical fitness in order to perform gymnastic-like maneuvers and in tossing and supporting the over-head weight of other team members. To date, only one study has characterized physiological outcomes in competitive collegiate-level male cheerleaders, and none have reported on adaptations in bone mineral density.PURPOSE: To compare areal bone mineral density (aBMD) of the hip and lumbar spine between male competitive collegiate-level cheerleaders and age, height, and weight-matched recreationally resistance-trained male controls.METHODS: Thirteen male competitive collegiate-level cheerleaders (mean ± SD, age: 22.7 ± 2.1 yrs, height: 1.81 ± 0.07 m, weight: 88.8 ± 10.9 kg) and 13 age, height, and weight-matched (age: 22.2 ± 2.0 yrs, height: 1.81 ± 0.06 m, weight: 87.5 ± 10.6 kg) recreationally resistance-trained male controls (CON) underwent a dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scan for assessment of aBMD of the non-dominant proximal femur (total hip, femoral neck, and trochanter) and lumbar spine (L1-L4) as well as percent body fat (%BF), bone free lean body mass (BFLM), and appendicular lean mass (aLM).RESULTS: According to design, there were no differences in age, height, or weight between groups. On average, cheerleaders trained (resistance + cheer) 5.0 ± 0.9 days per week whereas CON trained (resistance only) 3.5 ± 0.7 days per week. Compared to CON, cheerleaders had significantly lower %BF (13.8 ± 4.8 vs. 19.2 ± 4.2 %, p=0.005) and higher BFLM (73.1± 6.7 vs. 66.8 ± 7.9 kg, p= 0.04) and aLM (34.1 ± 3.4 vs. 29.9 ± 4.6 kg, p= 0.013). Similarly, cheerleaders had significantly higher aBMD of the total hip (1.210 ± 0.096 vs. 1.109 ± 0.107 g/cm2, p=0.031), trochanter (0.890 ± 0.074 vs. 0.0811 ± 0.074 g/cm2, p=0.013), and lumbar spine (1.198 ± 0.136 vs. 1.087 ± 0.119 g/cm2, p=0.013).CONCLUSION: The additional exposure of cheer-specific training, versus resistance training alone, seems to confer greater benefit to clinically relevant bone sites with regard to aBMD.
Click on the link to access this abstract at the publisher's website.