NT Sports Therapy

31/08/2026

Reactive Strength: Bridging the Gap Between Rehabilitation and Athletic Performance

Reactive strength becomes increasingly important as rehabilitation progresses from restoring basic function towards the speed, power and movement demands of sport. According to Draovitch et al. (2022), return to sport should be viewed as a continuum rather than a single clearance point, with rehabilitation progressively developing strength, power, movement quality, conditioning and sport-specific capacity.

An athlete may regain strength without yet being prepared for rapid force absorption and production during jumping, landing and multidirectional movement. Hoover, VanWye and Judge (2015) emphasise that physiological stress must be progressively reapplied during rehabilitation so recovering tissues and physical capacities can adapt to increasing demands. Their rehabilitation framework progresses towards more dynamic activities including box drops, bounding, barrier jumps and multidirectional hopping.

Reactive strength can therefore help bridge the transition from controlled rehabilitation towards athletic performance, but it should not be viewed as a standalone marker of readiness. Rehabilitation should progressively expose the athlete to faster, more demanding movement while assessing whether strength, power, movement, and load tolerance are being restored together (Draovitch et al., 2022). The goal is not simply to become strong again, but to regain the capacity to absorb, control and produce force under the demands of sport.

25/08/2026

Joint Hypermobility and Dynamic Stability: When Range Exceeds Active Control

Joint hypermobility is not just “extra flexibility”; it becomes clinically relevant when available range exceeds the person’s ability to actively control that range. According to Ituen et al. (2024), strength and balance are essential for controlling extra joint motion during activity and reducing musculoskeletal complications in children with generalised joint hypermobility.

Akaras et al. (2025) found that hypermobile individuals showed significantly poorer elbow and knee joint position sense than non-hypermobile individuals, even though grip strength and closed kinetic chain functional performance did not differ significantly between groups. This suggests that some hypermobile individuals may maintain functional stability through compensatory strategies but still have proprioceptive deficits that can affect active joint control.

This does not mean every hypermobile person is unstable or injured. More accurately, the clinical issue is whether the nervous system and muscular system can control the available range under load, fatigue, speed, and unpredictable movement demands. Akaras et al. (2025) highlight the importance of proprioceptive and neuromuscular training for hypermobile individuals, supporting rehabilitation that improves joint position awareness, strength through range, balance, landing control, and dynamic stability rather than simply restricting movement.

24/08/2026

Muscle Co-Contraction: Protective Strategy or Barrier to Efficient Movement?

Muscle co-contraction is the simultaneous activation of agonist and antagonist muscles around a joint. According to Armstrong, Deluzio, and Scott (2025), co-contraction is common during challenging tasks and can improve rapid corrective responses after mechanical perturbation, suggesting it may serve as a protective control strategy rather than simply an inefficient movement pattern.

In the uploaded preprint, Saliba et al. (2020) explain that co-contraction improved corrective responses during both postural and tracking tasks, but the benefit was not mainly due to increased stiffness alone. Instead, co-contraction allowed both stretched and shortened muscle groups to contribute to feedback control, creating a dual agonist-antagonist strategy that improved motor correction.

This does not mean more co-contraction is always better. Excessive co-contraction may increase metabolic cost, joint compression, stiffness, and movement restriction. However, low-level co-contraction may be useful when the body needs stability, rapid correction, or protection from unexpected disturbance. Clinically, the aim is not to remove co-contraction completely, but to decide whether it supports stability or becomes a barrier to efficient, adaptable movement (Armstrong, Deluzio and Scott, 2025).

20/08/2026

Joint Stiffness After Immobilisation: Restoring Motion Without Overloading

Joint stiffness after immobilisation is not only a loss of range; it may also involve altered joint-surface motion, capsular restriction, soft-tissue adaptation, and reduced load tolerance. According to Bączkowicz et al. (2020), immobilisation can lead to joint contracture, capsular shortening, synovial adhesions, arthrofibrosis, chondral softening, proteoglycan loss, and reduced cartilage thickness, all of which may affect how smoothly a joint moves.

In post-traumatic stiffness, treatment should be matched to severity rather than forced aggressively. Santacaterina et al. (2025) state that conservative management is recommended when there is no mechanical conflict, and physiotherapy may include manual therapy, therapeutic exercise, education, static or dynamic bracing, and careful progression. They also note that muscle energy techniques may support short-term improvements in pain and function, although long-term data remain limited.

This means restoring motion should not be reduced to “stretch harder.” Bączkowicz et al. (2020) found that after six weeks of knee immobilisation, arthrokinematic motion quality was impaired; two weeks of rehabilitation improved the measured joint-motion parameters, but did not fully restore them to normal control values. Clinically, this supports a graded approach using range-of-motion work, joint mobilisation, strengthening, proprioception, and progressive loading, while avoiding excessive force that may irritate recovering joint tissues.

15/08/2026

Whether you’re a manual therapist, osteopath, physiotherapist, chiropractor, sports therapist, massage therapist or movement practitioner, these videos have been created to strengthen your hands, your observation and your clinical reasoning.

They aren’t about memorising routines.

They’re about learning to recognise how the body organises itself, understanding where tension is being transmitted and developing practical skills you can apply immediately in clinic.

You can explore the videos at your own pace, revisit techniques whenever you need them and build confidence through repeated observation and practice.

If you’re considering the Professional Diploma in Myofascial Release for Postural Integration, the library is the perfect place to begin.

If you’re already an experienced practitioner, I hope it offers new perspectives that enrich the work you’re already doing.

The library is open, and I’d love to welcome you. You can access the library through our free community platform here: https://bit.ly/4zi5Di4 (or via the link in our bio)

— Christian Platts

13/08/2026

Force Transmission Through the Myofascial System: Clinical Implications for Rehabilitation

The myofascial system should not be viewed only as passive “wrapping” around muscles. According to Colonna, Maietti and Cuoghi (2026), myofascial force transmission is a mechanism whereby mechanical stimuli applied in one region may influence distant body segments through fascial continuity, although its functional relevance in vivo remains incompletely understood.

Krause et al. (2016) found moderate evidence that tension can be transferred across certain myofascial chain transitions, particularly within the superficial back line and the back functional line. Their review reported examples such as force transfer between the plantar fascia and Achilles tendon, between the hamstrings and the sacrotuberous ligament/thoracolumbar fascia, and between the latissimus dorsi and the contralateral gluteus maximus via the thoracolumbar fascia.

This does not mean every painful area is caused by a distant fascial restriction. More accurately, myofascial force transmission suggests that rehabilitation may need to consider regional load sharing, movement coordination, tissue stiffness, and chain-based mechanics when symptoms are persistent, recurrent, or linked to multi-joint movement. Krause et al. (2016) also caution that methods of force application and measurement varied between studies, so clinical interpretation should remain careful rather than overstated.

11/08/2026

Movement Variability: A Hallmark of Healthy Human Movement

Movement variability is not simply “poor technique” or random error. According to Mukherjee and Yentes (2018), movement fluctuations reflect a healthy system’s ability to adapt to changing environmental constraints. However, both too little and too much variability may be linked with injury risk or altered neuromuscular control.

Stergiou, Yu and Kyvelidou (2013) define human movement variability as the natural variations seen across repeated performances of the same task, explaining that even elite performers do not reproduce identical movement patterns every time. This supports Bernstein’s idea of “repetition without repetition”, where healthy movement contains flexible neuromotor solutions rather than robotic repetition.

This does not mean more variability is always better. Stergiou, Yu and Kyvelidou (2013) describe an optimal variability model, where healthy systems sit between excessive rigidity and excessive randomness. In rehabilitation, the aim should not be to remove all variation, but to restore adaptable movement that can respond to fatigue, speed, load, terrain, pain, and sporting demands without losing control.

09/08/2026

Arthrogenic Muscle Inhibition: Why Muscles Stop Working After Joint Injury

Arthrogenic muscle inhibition is a neurological response where a muscle fails to fully activate after joint injury, even when the muscle itself is not directly damaged. According to Sonnery-Cottet et al. (2022), AMI commonly occurs after knee injury or surgery and involves quadriceps activation failure caused by neural inhibition; clinically, it may present as poor vastus medialis obliquus activation, extension deficit, hamstring contracture, or chronic stiffness.

Norte, Rush and Sherman (2021) explain that AMI can create a “disconnect” between what the patient wants to do and what the muscle can produce, because otherwise healthy muscle becomes reflexively inhibited after joint trauma. This is not simply weakness from laziness, poor effort, or lack of strength training; it reflects altered neural signalling from the injured joint, including changes linked with pain, effusion, inflammation, joint laxity, and disrupted mechanoreceptor input.

This matters because untreated AMI can limit rehabilitation progress. Norte, Rush and Sherman (2021) report that joint injury is associated with reduced motor neuron availability, central activation failure, lower spinal-reflexive excitability, and altered sensory input to the spinal cord and brain. Therefore, rehabilitation should not only strengthen the muscle but also address pain, swelling, inflammation, activation failure, neuromuscular control, and progressive loading so the nervous system can restore effective voluntary recruitment.

07/08/2026

06/08/2026

Rate of Force Development: An Underestimated Factor in Athletic Performance and Injury Prevention

Rate of force development refers to how quickly force can be produced during the early phase of contraction, not simply how much force can eventually be produced. According to Maffiuletti et al. (2016), RFD is increasingly used to characterise explosive strength in athletes, patients, and older adults because it may relate more closely than maximal strength to sport-specific and functional tasks.

Levernier and Laffaye (2017) explain that explosive force is particularly important in climbing because athletes often have very little time to grip strongly during dynamic movements. Their study found that RFD at 200 ms and RFD at 95% of maximal force were reliable and able to discriminate between international climbers, skilled climbers, and non-climbers, suggesting that RFD can be useful for monitoring training adaptations.

This does not mean RFD replaces maximal strength. More accurately, performance and injury prevention require both force capacity and speed of force expression. Maffiuletti et al. (2016) highlight that early RFD is strongly influenced by neural factors such as rapid muscle activation and motor unit discharge rate, while later RFD becomes more influenced by muscular and contractile properties. Therefore, rehabilitation and performance training should include controlled explosive intent, rapid stabilisation drills, plyometric progressions, and sport-specific force production, not only slow strength work.