PURPOSE: The objectives of this study were 1) to examine the differences between a noninjured (C) cohort of runners (N = 70) and runners afflicted with anterior knee pain (AKP) according to selected training, anthropometric, rearfoot motion, ground reaction force, and muscular strength and endurance variables; 2) to explore multivariate relationships among these measures in the well and injured groups; and 3) to develop specific hypotheses concerning risk factors for injury that will later be tested in a prospective clinical study. METHODS: High speed videography (200 frames x s(-1)), a force platform (500 Hz), and a Cybex II+ isokinetic dynamometer were used to assess rearfoot motion, ground reaction forces, and knee muscular strength and endurance, respectively. A linear discriminant function was performed on each of the five categories of variables and revealed 19 significant (P < or = 0.05) predictors. These variables were then combined and a final discriminant function analysis was performed. RESULTS: Pronation through the first 10% of stance, arch index, shoe mileage, and extension peak torque were the best overall (P < or = 0.05) predictors. The AKP group had smaller mean values on all four significant predictors. CONCLUSION: With the exception of shoe mileage, which is likely a response to rather than a risk factor for AKP, these results should prove useful to clinicians in identifying runners at risk for anterior knee pain.
PURPOSE: The objectives of this study were 1) to examine the differences between a noninjured (C) cohort of runners (N = 70) and runners afflicted with anterior knee pain (AKP) according to selected training, anthropometric, rearfoot motion, ground reaction force, and muscular strength and endurance variables; 2) to explore multivariate relationships among these measures in the well and injured groups; and 3) to develop specific hypotheses concerning risk factors for injury that will later be tested in a prospective clinical study. METHODS: High speed videography (200 frames x s(-1)), a force platform (500 Hz), and a Cybex II+ isokinetic dynamometer were used to assess rearfoot motion, ground reaction forces, and knee muscular strength and endurance, respectively. A linear discriminant function was performed on each of the five categories of variables and revealed 19 significant (P < or = 0.05) predictors. These variables were then combined and a final discriminant function analysis was performed. RESULTS: Pronation through the first 10% of stance, arch index, shoe mileage, and extension peak torque were the best overall (P < or = 0.05) predictors. The AKP group had smaller mean values on all four significant predictors. CONCLUSION: With the exception of shoe mileage, which is likely a response to rather than a risk factor for AKP, these results should prove useful to clinicians in identifying runners at risk for anterior knee pain.
Authors: Brian Noehren; Michael B Pohl; Zack Sanchez; Tom Cunningham; Christian Lattermann Journal: Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) Date: 2011-11-08 Impact factor: 2.063
Authors: Saikat Pal; Christine E Draper; Michael Fredericson; Garry E Gold; Scott L Delp; Gary S Beaupre; Thor F Besier Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2010-11-12 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Rodolfo A Dellagrana; Fernando Diefenthaeler; Felipe P Carpes; Sara G Hernandez; Wagner de Campos Journal: Int J Sports Phys Ther Date: 2015-08
Authors: Maria Ortqvist; Eva B Moström; Ewa M Roos; Pia Lundell; Per-Mats Janarv; Suzanne Werner; Eva W Broström Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2011-05-17 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Sara R Piva; G Kelley Fitzgerald; James J Irrgang; Julie M Fritz; Stephen Wisniewski; Gerald T McGinty; John D Childs; Manuel A Domenech; Scott Jones; Anthony Delitto Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2009-02 Impact factor: 3.966