The 30-seconds all-out sprint test on the cycle ergometer was performed by 10 high school and 13 college men’s cyclists. In addition, this study investigated their best time for 200 m (200mTT) and 1000 m (1000mTT) time trials in the velodrome. This study clarifies the relationship between muscle thickness of thigh, shank, and trunk and 1) the average speed for the 200mTT and 2) the 1000mTT in the field, and 3) the mean power of the 30-seconds all-out sprint cycling test. 1) The average speed for the 200mTT significantly correlated with the muscle thickness of posterior shank and front and lateral abdomen. 2) The average speed for the 1000mTT significantly correlated with the muscle thickness of posterior thigh and shank and front and lateral abdomen. 3) The mean power of the 30-seconds all-out sprint cycling test significantly correlated with the muscle thickness of anterior and posterior thigh, posterior shank, and front and lateral abdomen. Except for the average speed for the 200mTT and 1000mTT, the mean power of the 30-seconds all-out sprint cycling test was significantly related to the muscle thickness of anterior thigh. These results suggest that increasing muscle thickness of posterior thigh and shank and front and lateral abdomen is important for enhancing performance in sprint cycling.

The purpose of this study was to clarify the number of types and frequencies of fundamental movement patterns (FMP) during Soccer Kids Program (SKP) recommended by the Japan Football Association for preschool children, and to clarify the relationship between FMP and Moderate to Vigorous Physical Activity (MVPA; ≥3 METs). The participants were 12 children (six boys and six girls). The SKP was conducted for 50 minutes with video recording, and researchers counted the number of FMP during SKP by replaying the video. The FMP during SKP was classified into three movement categories: stability (eight types), locomotion (eight types), and manipulation (18 types). The participants wore a triaxial accelerometer (Active Style Pro, OMRON) on their waist during SKP and measured their activity (intensity and step) every ten seconds. Partial correlation analysis was performed on the relationship between MVPA and FMP using age in months and gender as covariates. MVPA during SKP was 24.3±5.0 minutes (48.7%), which was considerably more than in previous studies. Total number of FMP during SKP was 637.8±183.5 (stability: 27.8±12.4, locomotion: 399.7±156.6, manipulation: 210.3±48.4) and the mean number of types of FMP was 14.6±2.0 types. The FMP was confirmed in all three categories. There were significant correlations between MVPA and the total FMP (r = 0.72), the number of stability (r = 0.83), and the types of FMP (r = 0.69). This study suggested that an association between MVPA and FMP (total FMP, total stability, and type of FMP) in SKP.

Background/Aims: The Lyon Consensus defined parameters based on upper endoscopy and 24-hour combined multichannel intraluminal impedancepH (MII-pH), that conclusively establish the presence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). However, the true role of upper endoscopy and MII-pH to evaluate patients with extraesophageal symptoms (EES) has not been well established. Hypopharyngeal MII (HMII), which directly measures laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) events, has been utilized to evaluate patients with EES suggestive of LPR. Methods: This was a retrospective study involving patients with EES for > 12 weeks despite proton pump inhibitor therapy, and had no endoscopic confirmatory evidence for GERD and negative MII-pH. All patients were subsequently referred for further evaluation of EES with “unknown” etiology and underwent laryngoscopy and HMII. Based on HMII, abnormal proximal exposure (APE) was defined as LPR ≥ 1/day and/or full column reflux (reflux 2 cm distal to the upper esophageal sphincter) > 4/day. Patients with APE were offered antireflux surgery (ARS) and the outcome of ARS was objectively assessed using Reflux Symptom Index. Results: Of 21 patients with EES which was thought to be GERD-unrelated based on endoscopy and MII-pH, 17 patients (81%) had APE. Eight patients with APE who had undergone ARS had significant symptomatic improvement in the Reflux Symptom Index score (19.6 ± 4.9 pre-ARS to 5.8 ± 1.4 post-ARS, P = 0.008). Conclusions A conventional diagnostic approach using endoscopy and MII-pH may not be sufficient to evaluate patients with EES suggestive of LPR. HMII is essential to evaluate patients with EES, and APE could be a reliable indicator for successful treatment outcomes.