## 4 Discussion
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Group**} \\ \cline{2-5}  & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Injured**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Healthy**} \\ \hline
**Variable** & **Mean** & **Std. Dev.** & **Mean** & **Std. Dev.** \\ \hline \multicolumn{5}{c}{**Range of Movement Asymmetries (\%)**} \\ \hline Hip Flexion Flexed Knee Asymmetry & 2.74 & 1.88 & 3.73 & 2.82 \\ Hip Flexion Extended Knee Asymmetry & 4.68 & 2.12 & 9.11 & 9.44 \\ Hip Extension Flexed Knee Asymmetry & 10.00 & 6.09 & 14.71 & 10.51 \\ Hip Abduction Flexed Knee Asymmetry & 6.64 & 5.89 & 8.97 & 7.33 \\ Knee Flexion Asymmetry & 8.10 & 6.97 & 4.84 & 3.38 \\ Ankle Flexion Extended Knee Asymmetry & 4.68 & 2.76 & 6.80 & 5.29 \\ Ankle Flexion Flexed Knee Asymmetry & 7.96 & 3.56 & 5.81 & 4.72 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: _Cont._viewed as a window for development. Therefore, training should be focused on improving the performance and function of the non-dominant limb without neglecting the dominant limb [12]. The obtained results are in line with previous research that did not associate interlimb strength and/or range of movement asymmetries with injury risk [10; 13; 14; 15; 16; 17; 18], because no differences were found in any neuromuscular and range of motion asymmetry scores between the injured and healthy groups, except greater asymmetry in maximum isometric hip abduction strength in the injured players. A probable explanation for the non-significant association between interlimb asymmetries and injury occurrence is the relationship between fatigue, asymmetries, and injury risk [9]. Previous research has proposed that the combination of fatigue and interlimb asymmetry could be a risk factor mediating the occurrence of injury more than baseline (without fatigue) asymmetry [9]. In this regard, repeated sprints increase interlimb asymmetries through acute fatigue [47]. Considering that our results, in general, did not associate baseline interlimb asymmetry with injury occurrence, future research could evaluate the effect of match-related fatigue before and after the game. The association between asymmetries and injury risk cannot be confirmed or ruled out [7; 8; 12]. Focusing on the potential effects of interlimb asymmetries on performance, previous studies have analyzed the effects of interlimb jump asymmetries on the sprint [48; 49], jump [11; 48; 49], and change of direction [50] performance in athletes, with controversial results. Although this is an exploratory study, there are certain limitations that should be considered in future research. Even though our results showed, in general, no effect of interlimb asymmetries on the occurrence of injuries, given the limited sample size, particularly in the injured group, the power of our analysis is reduced, and the results should be interpreted with caution. This study should be seen as an exploratory analysis, opening the door to future research with larger and more diverse samples to confirm or refute these findings. Additionally, factors such as training load, intensity, or match participation could influence both performance in the screening tests and injury risk and should be considered in future investigations. Although not the focus of the current study, it could be interesting to analyze the severity, type of injury, or the time of absence following the injury in future research. In summary, our results could not confirm the association between interlimb asymmetries and the occurrence of injuries. Bearing in mind the evidence presented and the scientific literature consulted, individualization of interlimb asymmetry tests and thresholds should be considered in practical applications. The observed differences can serve as trends for coaches and future researchers in the assessment of asymmetries to detect limitations that may be associated with a higher risk of injury. However, further research on this topic is needed.