DOCUMENT
BACKGROUND: Instability of the knee joint during gait is frequently reported by patients with knee osteoarthritis or an anterior cruciate ligament rupture. The assessment of instability in clinical practice and clinical research studies mainly relies on self-reporting. Alternatively, parameters measured with gait analysis have been explored as suitable objective indicators of dynamic knee (in)stability.RESEARCH QUESTION: This literature review aimed to establish an inventory of objective parameters of knee stability during gait.METHODS: Five electronic databases (Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane, Cinahl and SPORTDiscuss) were systematically searched, with keywords concerning knee, stability and gait. Eligible studies used an objective parameter(s) to assess knee (in)stability during gait, being stated in the introduction or methods section. Out of 10717 studies, 89 studies were considered eligible.RESULTS: Fourteen different patient populations were investigated with kinematic, kinetic and/or electromyography measurements during (challenged) gait. Thirty-three possible objective parameters were identified for knee stability, of which the majority was based on kinematic (14 parameters) or electromyography (12 parameters) measurements. Thirty-nine studies used challenged gait (i.e. external perturbations, downhill walking) to provoke knee joint instability. Limited or conflicting results were reported on the validity of the 33 parameters.SIGNIFICANCE: In conclusion, a large number of different candidates for an objective knee stability gait parameter were found in literature, all without compelling evidence. A clear conceptual definition for dynamic knee joint stability is lacking, for which we suggest : "The capacity to respond to a challenge during gait within the natural boundaries of the knee". Furthermore biomechanical gait laboratory protocols should be harmonized, to enable future developments on clinically relevant measure(s) of knee stability during gait.
LINK
This study investigated the effect of work pace on workload, motor variability and fatigue during light assembly work. Upper extremity kinematics and electromyography (EMG) were obtained on a cycle-to-cycle basis for eight participants during two conditions, corresponding to "normal" and "high" work pace according to a predetermined time system for engineering. Indicators of fatigue, pain sensitivity and performance were recorded before, during and after the task. The level and variability of muscle activity did not differ according to work pace, and manifestations of muscle fatigue or changed pain sensitivity were not observed. In the high work pace, however, participants moved more efficiently, they showed more variability in wrist speed and acceleration, but they also made more errors. These results suggest that an increased work pace, within the range addressed here, will not have any substantial adverse effects on acute motor performance and fatigue in light, cyclic assembly work.STATEMENT OF RELEVANCE: In the manufacturing industry, work pace is a key issue in production system design and hence of interest to ergonomists as well as engineers. In this laboratory study, increasing the work pace did not show adverse effects in terms of biomechanical exposures and muscle fatigue, but it did lead to more errors. For the industrial engineer, this observation suggests that an increase in work pace might diminish production quality, even without any noticeable fatigue being experienced by the operators.
DOCUMENT
