BACKGROUND: Generalized Joint Hypermobility (GJH) has been found to be associated with musculoskeletal complaints and disability. For others GJH is seen as a prerequisite in order to excel in certain sports like dance. However, it remains unclear what the role is of GJH in human performance. Therefore, the purpose of the study was to establish the association between GJH and functional status and to explore the contribution of physical fitness and musculoskeletal complaints to this association.METHODS: A total of 72 female participants (mean age (SD; range): 19.6 (2.2; 17-24)) were recruited among students from the Amsterdam School of Health Professions (ASHP) (n = 36) and the Amsterdam School of Arts (ASA), Academy for dance and theater (n = 36) in Amsterdam, The Netherlands. From each participant the following data was collected: Functional status performance (self-reported Physical activity level) and capacity (walking distance and jumping capacity: side hop (SH) and square hop (SQH)), presence of GJH (Beighton score ≥4), muscle strength, musculoskeletal complaints (pain and fatigue) and demographic characteristics (age and BMI).RESULTS: GJH was negatively associated with all capacity measures of functional status. Subjects with GJH had a reduced walking distance (B(SE):-75.5(10.5), p = <.0001) and jumping capacity (SH: B(SE):-10.10(5.0), p = .048, and SQH: B(SE):-11.2(5.1), p = .024) in comparison to subjects without GJH, when controlling for confounding: age, BMI and musculoskeletal complaints. In participants with GJH, functional status was not associated with performance measures.CONCLUSION: GJH was independently associated with lower walking and jumping capacity, potentially due to the compromised structural integrity of connective tissue. However, pain, fatigue and muscle strength were also important contributors to functional status.
Generalized joint hypermobility (GJH) is highly prevalent among patients diagnosed with chronic pain. When GJH is accompanied by pain in ≥4 joints over a period ≥3 months in the absence of other conditions that cause chronic pain, the hypermobility syndrome (HMS) may be diagnosed. In addition, GJH is also a clinical sign that is frequently present in hereditary diseases of the connective tissue, such as the Marfan syndrome, osteogenesis imperfecta, and the Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. However, within the Ehlers-Danlos spectrum, a similar subcategory of patients having similar clinical features as HMS but lacking a specific genetic profile was identified: Ehlers-Danlos syndrome hypermobility type (EDS-HT). Researchers and clinicians have struggled for decades with the highly diverse clinical presentation within the HMS and EDS-HT phenotypes (Challenge 1) and the lack of understanding of the pathological mechanisms that underlie the development of pain and its persistence (Challenge 2). In addition, within the HMS/EDS-HT phenotype, there is a high prevalence of psychosocial factors, which again presents a difficult issue that needs to be addressed (Challenge 3). Despite recent scientific advances, many obstacles for clinical care and research still remain. To gain further insight into the phenotype of HMS/EDS-HT and its mechanisms, clearer descriptions of these populations should be made available. Future research and clinical care should revise and create consensus on the diagnostic criteria for HMS/EDS-HT (Solution 1), account for clinical heterogeneity by the classification of subtypes within the HMS/EDS-HT spectrum (Solution 2), and create a clinical core set (Solution 3).
Marfan syndrome (MFS) is a multisystemic, autosomal dominant connective tissue disorder that occurs de novo in 25%. In many families, parent and child(ren) are affected, which may increase distress in parents. To assess distress, 42 mothers (29% MFS) and 25 fathers (60% MFS) of 43 affected children, completed the validated screening‐questionnaire Distress thermometer for parents of a chronically ill child, including questions on overall distress (score 0–10; ≥4 denoting “clinical distress”) and everyday problems (score 0–36). Data were compared to 1,134 control‐group‐parents of healthy children. Mothers reported significantly less overall distress (2, 1–4 vs. 3, 1–6; p = .049; r = −.07) and total everyday problems (3, 0–6 vs. 4, 1–8; p = .03; r = −.08) compared to control‐group‐mothers. Mothers without MFS reported significantly less overall distress compared to mothers with MFS, both of a child with MFS (1, 0–4 vs. 3.5, 2–5; p = .039; r = −.17). No significant differences were found between the father‐groups, nor between the group of healthy parents of an affected child living together with an affected partner compared to control‐group‐parents. No differences in percentages of clinical distress were reported between mothers and control‐group‐mothers (33 vs. 42%); fathers and control‐group‐fathers (28 vs. 32%); nor between the other groups. Distress was not associated with the children's MFS characteristics. Concluding, parents of a child with MFS did not show more clinical distress compared to parents of healthy children. However, clinical distress was reported in approximately one‐third and may increase in case of acute medical complications. We advise monitoring distress in parents of a child with MFS to provide targeted support.
