Identifying increases in injury-relevant biomechanics when athletes are distracted by a secondary task may be important for assessing performance and injury risk in athletic environments. It is unknown if this dual task cost (DTC) measured during detailed motion capture testing is associated with DTC on simple clinical tests. Such a relationship may prove useful for improving clinically feasible return-to-play assessments.
PURPOSE: Investigate whether dual-task ability spans clinical and laboratory methods of assessment. METHODS: Twenty-three female soccer players (21 ± 3yrs, 1.7 ± 0.1m, 64 ± 10kg) completed an agility drill requiring two 90° turns and one 180° turn. This was completed in isolation (baseline) and under three dual-task conditions: counting backwards by seven (S7), dribbling a soccer ball (BH), and combined ball dribbling and counting tasks (BHS7). Agility drill DTC (aDTC) was calculated as the percent change in completion time between dual-task and baseline conditions. A jump-land-jump task from a 30 cm box was also completed while 3D kinematics and kinetics were recorded. Dual task jump conditions included working memory (WM), working memory + visual attention task (WMV), and unanticipated working memory + visual attention task (UWMV) tasks. Biomechanical DTC (bDTC) was calculated as the percent change in peak knee valgus moment (pkVM) between dual-task jump landings and a single-task jump landing. Spearman’s rho correlations were run between all combinations of aDTC and bDTC (Figure 1). RESULTS: Increases in aDTC for the S7 condition were associated with increases in bDTC for the WMV (ρ=0.49, p=0.02) and the WM (ρ=0.43, p=0.04) conditions. No other relationships reached significance (i.e., p>0.05). CONCLUSION: Dual-task ability spanned clinical and laboratory assessments when the secondary task was an anticipated cognitive task. Further research is needed to establish the clinical utility of these relationships.