BackgroundGait analysis has been used for decades to quantify knee function in patients with knee osteoarthritis; however, it is unknown whether and to what extent inter-laboratory differences affect the comparison of gait data between studies. Therefore, the aim of this study was to perform an inter-laboratory comparison of knee biomechanics and muscle activation patterns during gait of patients with knee osteoarthritis.MethodsKnee biomechanics and muscle activation patterns from patients with knee osteoarthritis were analyzed, previously collected at Dalhousie University (DAL: n = 55) and Amsterdam UMC, VU medical center (VUmc: n = 39), using their in-house protocols. Additionally, one healthy male was measured at both locations. Both direct comparisons and after harmonization of components of the protocols were made. Inter-laboratory comparisons were quantified using statistical parametric mapping analysis and discrete gait parameters.ResultsThe inter-laboratory comparison showed offsets in the sagittal plane angles, moments and frontal plane angles, and phase shifts in the muscle activation patterns. Filter characteristics, initial contact identification and thigh anatomical frame definitions were harmonized between the laboratories. After this first step in protocol harmonization, the offsets in knee angles and sagittal plane moments remained, but the inter-laboratory comparison of the muscle activation patterns improved.ConclusionsInter-laboratory differences obstruct valid comparisons of gait datasets from patients with knee osteoarthritis between gait laboratories. A first step in harmonization of gait analysis protocols improved the inter-laboratory comparison. Further protocol harmonization is recommended to enable valid comparisons between labs, data-sharing and multicenter trials to investigate knee function in patients with knee osteoarthritis.
MULTIFILE
BACKGROUND: Patients with knee osteoarthritis can adapt their gait to unload the most painful knee joint in order to try to reduce pain and improve physical function. However, these gait adaptations can cause higher loads on the contralateral joints. The aim of the study was to investigate the interlimb differences in knee and hip frontal plane moments during gait in patients with knee osteoarthritis and in healthy controls.METHODS: Forty patients with knee osteoarthritis and 19 healthy matched controls were measured during comfortable treadmill walking. Frontal plane joint moments were obtained of both hip and knee joints. Differences in interlimb moments within each group were assessed using statistical parametric mapping and discrete gait parameters.FINDINGS: No interlimb differences were observed in patients with knee osteoarthritis and control subjects at group level. Furthermore, the patients presented similar interlimb variability as the controls. In a small subgroup (n = 12) of patients, the moments in the most painful knee were lower than in the contralateral knee, while the other patients (n = 28) showed higher moments in the most painful knee compared to the contralateral knee. However, no interlimb differences in the hip moments were observed within the subgroups.INTERPRETATION: Patients with knee osteoarthritis do not have interlimb differences in knee and hip joint moments. Patients and healthy subjects demonstrate a similar interlimb variability in the moments of the lower extremities. In this context, differences in knee pain in patients with knee osteoarthritis did not induce any interlimb differences in the frontal plane knee and hip moments.
DOCUMENT
Background: Knee and hip osteoarthritis (OA) among older adults account for substantial disability and extensive healthcare use. Effective pain coping strategies help to deal with OA. This study aims to determine the long-term relationship between pain coping style and the course of healthcare use in patients with knee and/or hip OA over 10 years. Methods: Baseline and 10-year follow-up data of 861 Dutch participants with early knee and/or hip OA from the Cohort Hip and Cohort Knee (CHECK) cohort were used. The amount of healthcare use (HCU) and pain coping style were measured. Generalized Estimating Equations were used, adjusted for relevant confounders. Results: At baseline, 86.5% of the patients had an active pain coping style. Having an active pain coping style was significantly (p = 0.022) associated with an increase of 16.5% (95% CI, 2.0–32.7) in the number of used healthcare services over 10 years. Conclusion: Patients with early knee and/or hip OA with an active pain coping style use significantly more different healthcare services over 10 years, as opposed to those with a passive pain coping style. Further research should focus on altered treatment (e.g., focus on self-management) in patients with an active coping style, to reduce HCU.
DOCUMENT
Knee joint instability is frequently reported by patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA). Objective metrics to assess knee joint instability are lacking, making it difficult to target therapies aiming to improve stability. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare responses in neuromechanics to perturbations during gait in patients with self-reported knee joint instability (KOA-I) versus patients reporting stable knees (KOA-S) and healthy control subjects.Forty patients (20 KOA-I and 20 KOA-S) and 20 healthy controls were measured during perturbed treadmill walking. Knee joint angles and muscle activation patterns were compared using statistical parametric mapping and discrete gait parameters. Furthermore, subgroups (moderate versus severe KOA) based on Kellgren and Lawrence classification were evaluated.Patients with KOA-I generally had greater knee flexion angles compared to controls during terminal stance and during swing of perturbed gait. In response to deceleration perturbations the patients with moderate KOA-I increased their knee flexion angles during terminal stance and pre-swing. Knee muscle activation patterns were overall similar between the groups. In response to sway medial perturbations the patients with severe KOA-I increased the co-contraction of the quadriceps versus hamstrings muscles during terminal stance.Patients with KOA-I respond to different gait perturbations by increasing knee flexion angles, co-contraction of muscles or both during terminal stance. These alterations in neuromechanics could assist in the assessment of knee joint instability in patients, to provide treatment options accordingly. Furthermore, longitudinal studies are needed to investigate the consequences of altered neuromechanics due to knee joint instability on the development of KOA.
DOCUMENT
Background The gait modification strategies Trunk Lean and Medial Thrust have been shown to reduce the external knee adduction moment (EKAM) in patients with knee osteoarthritis which could contribute to reduced progression of the disease. Which strategy is most optimal differs between individuals, but the underlying mechanism that causes this remains unknown. Research question Which gait parameters determine the optimal gait modification strategy for individual patients with knee osteoarthritis? Methods Forty-seven participants with symptomatic medial knee osteoarthritis underwent 3-dimensional motion analysis during comfortable gait and with two gait modification strategies: Medial Thrust and Trunk Lean. Kinematic and kinetic variables were calculated. Participants were then categorized into one of the two subgroups, based on the modification strategy that reduced the EKAM the most for them. Multiple logistic regression analysis with backward elimination was used to investigate the predictive nature of dynamic parameters obtained during comfortable walking on the optimal modification gait strategy. Results For 68.1 % of the participants, Trunk Lean was the optimal strategy in reducing the EKAM. Baseline characteristics, kinematics and kinetics did not differ significantly between subgroups during comfortable walking. Changes to frontal trunk and tibia angles correlated significantly with EKAM reduction during the Trunk Lean and Medial Thrust strategies, respectively. Regression analysis showed that MT is likely optimal when the frontal tibia angle range of motion and peak knee flexion angle in early stance during comfortable walking are high (R2Nagelkerke = 0.12). Significance Our regression model based solely on kinematic parameters from comfortable walking contained characteristics of the frontal tibia angle and knee flexion angle. As the model explains only 12.3 % of variance, clinical application does not seem feasible. Direct assessment of kinetics seems to be the most optimal strategy for selecting the most optimal gait modification strategy for individual patients with knee osteoarthritis.
MULTIFILE
The pervasiveness of wearable technology has opened the market for products that analyse running biomechanics and provide feedback to the user. To improve running technique feedback should target specific running biomechanical key points and promote an external focus. Aim for this study was to define and empirically test tailored feedback requirements for optimal motor learning in four consumer available running wearables. First, based on desk research and observations of coaches, a screening protocol was developed. Second, four wearables were tested according to the protocol. Third, results were reviewed, and four experts identified future requirements. Testing and reviewing the selected wearables with the protocol revealed that only two less relevant running biomechanical key points were measured. Provided feedback promotes an external focus of the user. Tailoring was absent in all wearables. These findings indicate that consumer available running wearables have a potential for optimal motor learning but need improvements as well.
DOCUMENT
Purpose: Instability of the knee joint is reported by a majority (>65%) of patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA) and is hypothesized to play a crucial role in the initiation and progression of KOA. A generally accepted objective metric of knee joint stability is lacking, making development of diagnostics and treatment options for knee joint instability more difficult. Such a metric should be based on how gait biomechanics and muscle activation in the unstable knee joint differ from those in a stable knee joint. To challenge knee joint instability, external perturbations during gait are needed to replicate the situations in daily life that require stability of the knee joint. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare the responses in knee biomechanics and muscle activation patterns to different types of external perturbations during gait of patients with self-reported knee joint instability (KOA-I) versus patients reporting stable knees (KOA-S) and healthy control subjects.Methods: Forty patients (60% female) were included in this study with a mean age of 66 years (range: 52-82), body mass index of 26 (range: 19-32) and Kellgren and Lawrence grade of 2.5 (range 0-4). Patients were dichotomized in a KOA-I group (n=20) and KOA-S group (n=20) based on if they had perceived an episode of knee joint instability in the past four weeks. Furthermore, twenty age-, gender- and BMI-matched healthy control subjects were measured. The participants walked on a dual-belt instrumented treadmill while different external perturbations were applied, triggered by heel strike of the most affected leg (figure 1). The external perturbations consisted of sway left (SL) or sway right (SR) translations (4 cm) or accelerations (AC) or decelerations (DC) of one belt (1.6 m/s walking speed change in 0.23 seconds). Knee kinematics and muscle activation patterns of the perturbed gait cycles were collected using a motion capture system and surface electromyography. The three groups were compared using statistical parametric mapping (SPM) and discrete values by analysis of variance. The discrete values of the knee angles (initial contact, peak and range of motion (ROM) values) and muscle activation patterns (peak, mean and co-contraction index (CCI) values) were corrected for walking speed.Results: The SPM analysis results (example provided in figure 2) showed that in response to the SL perturbations the KOA-I group walked with greater knee flexion angles (KFA) during pre-swing compared to the control group (SPM, p<0.01) and during mid-swing compared to the KOA-S group and control group (SPM, p<0.01). Moreover, during the SR perturbed gait cycles the KOA-I group had greater KFA during mid-swing compared to the KOA-S group (SPM, p=0.01). In response to the AC perturbations the KOA-I group walked with a greater KFA during late terminal stance compared to the control group (SPM, p<0.01). Furthermore, the KOA-I group had greater KFA during the pre-swing phase of the DC perturbed gait cycles compared to the control group (SPM, p<0.01). The significant results from the comparison of the discrete values are presented in table 1. The KOA-I group had greater peak KFA during the swing phase of all perturbed gait cycles (independent of perturbation type) compared to the KOA-S group and control group (p<0.01). Moreover, during both sway perturbations (SL, SR) higher KFA ROM were observed in the KOA-I group compared to the KOA-S group (p<0.05). Besides this, the KOA-I group presented higher CCI of the medial muscles (vastus medialis and medial hamstring) compared to the KOA-S group during the DC perturbation (p=0.03). Furthermore, changes in vastus medialis and gluteus medius muscle activation in response to different external perturbations were observed in the KOA-S group compared to the control group and the KOA-I group (p<0.05).Conclusions: Patients with KOA-I walked with greater knee flexion angles during peak stance, late-terminal stance, pre-swing and mid-swing in response to different external perturbations, which could be a distinctive strategy of these patients to maintain stability of the knee joint during these phases of gait. Besides this, only few alterations were observed in the knee muscle activation patterns between the groups. This could be explained by the large variation between subjects in the muscle activations patterns which might indicate different neuromuscular strategies to respond to the external perturbations. Future studies with larger sample sizes are required to test the reliability and validity of the knee flexion angle as a candidate for the objective measurement of knee joint stability and to further investigate neuromuscular control of the unstable osteoarthritic knee.
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
Within this study the aim is to measure running workload and relevant running technique key points on varying cadence in recreational runners using a custom build sensor system ‘Nodes’. Seven participants ran on a treadmill at a self-chosen comfortable speed. Cadence was randomly guided by a metronome using 92%, 96%, 100%, 104%, and 108% of the preferred cadence in 2-min trials. Workload was measured by collecting the heart rate and the rating of perceived exertion (RPE 1 to 10) scores. Heart rate data shows that the 100% cadence trial was most economical with a relative heart rate of 99.2%. The 108% cadence trial had the lowest relative RPE score with 96.2%. The sample rate of the Nodes system during this experiment was too low to analyze the key points. Three requirements are proposed for the further engineering of a wearable running system, (i) sampling frequency of minimal 50 Hz, (ii) step-by-step analysis, and (iii) collecting workload in the heart rate and RPE.
DOCUMENT
Background: Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common rheumatic disease of the musculoskeletal system, with the knee as the most affected joint. The number of people with OA of the knee is likely to increase due to the ageing society and the obesity epidemic. The predominant clinical symptom of knee OA is pain, which is described as worsening by activity and relieving by rest. Knee instability has been recognized as an important clinical feature in persons with knee OA. Pain and knee instability are associated with limitations in performing daily activities. Non-pharmacological options in the management of knee OA consist of education, weight loss, exercise, braces and physical therapy. Knee bracing has been recommended by the Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI). Valgus knee braces designed to decrease loads on the medial compartment of the knee for patients with varus alignment are the most common. It has been shown however, that valgus bracing may have little or no effect on pain and physical functioning, and adherence to this treatment in patients with knee OA is low.Because of ease of use and access, lack of complications and low cost, soft knee braces are commonly used in persons with knee OA. However, the evidence for efficacy of soft knee bracing on pain and activity limitations in knee OA is limited. Therefore, it is important to strengthen the evidence of using a soft brace to reduce pain and activity limitations as well as to evaluate the efficacy of soft knee bracing on knee instability in persons with knee OA. There is also debate about the effectiveness of soft braces in other affected joints of the lower extremity and in conditions other than OA such as rheumatoid arthritis.Objectives: The aim of the study will be to evaluate the effect of wearing a soft brace on dynamic knee instability in patients with OA of the knee.Methods: Persons with knee OA and self-reported knee instability from the Amsterdam Osteoarthritis cohort participated in a single-session lab-experimental study. A within-subject design was used, comparing no brace versus brace, and comparing a non-tight versus a tight brace (standard fit). The primary outcome measure was dynamic knee instability, expressed by the Perturbation Response (PR), i.e., a biomechanics based measure reflecting deviation in the mean knee varus-valgus angle after a controlled mechanical perturbation, standardized to the mean (SD) varus-valgus angle during level walking. Linear mixed-effect model analysis was used to evaluate the effect of a brace on dynamic knee instability.Results: The wearing of a soft brace reduced the knee instability significantly during perturbed walking. Results will also be presented from the literature search and from the lab-experimental study.Conclusion: Wearing a soft brace reduces dynamic knee instability in patients with knee OA. However, longitudinal studies are needed to evaluate the clinical implications of wearing a soft brace.
DOCUMENT
