Melinda M Franettovich Smith1, Conor Honeywill, Narelle Wyndow, Kay M Crossley, Mark W Creaby. 1. 1School of Physiotherapy, Australian Catholic University, AUSTRALIA; 2Melbourne School of Physiotherapy, University of Melbourne, AUSTRALIA; 3Division of Physiotherapy, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Queensland, AUSTRALIA; 4School of Exercise Science, Australian Catholic University, AUSTRALIA; and 5Centre for Health, Exercise & Sports Medicine, University of Melbourne, AUSTRALIA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the neuromotor control of the gluteus medius (GMED) and gluteus maximus (GMAX) muscles in runners with Achilles tendinopathy to that of healthy controls. METHODS: Fourteen male runners with Achilles tendinopathy and 19 healthy male runners (control) ran overground while EMG of GMED and GMAX was recorded. Three temporal variables were identified via visual inspection of EMG data: (i) onset of muscle activity (onset), (ii) offset of muscle activity (offset), and (iii) duration of muscle activity (duration). A multivariate analysis of covariance with between-subject factor of group (Achilles tendinopathy, control) and variables of onset, offset, and duration was performed for each muscle. Age, weight, and height were included as covariates, and α level was set at 0.05. RESULTS: The Achilles tendinopathy group demonstrated a delay in the activation of the GMED relative to heel strike (P < 0.001) and a shorter duration of activation (P < 0.001) compared to that of the control group. GMED offset time relative to heel strike was not different between the groups (P = 0.063). For GMAX, the Achilles tendinopathy group demonstrated a delay in its onset (P = 0.008), a shorter duration of activation (P = 0.002), and earlier offset (P < 0.001) compared to the control group. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides preliminary evidence of altered neuromotor control of the GMED and GMAX muscles in male runners with Achilles tendinopathy. Although further prospective studies are required to discern the causal nature of this relationship, this study highlights the importance of considering neuromotor control of the gluteal muscles in the assessment and management of patients with Achilles tendinopathy.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the neuromotor control of the gluteus medius (GMED) and gluteus maximus (GMAX) muscles in runners with Achilles tendinopathy to that of healthy controls. METHODS: Fourteen male runners with Achilles tendinopathy and 19 healthy male runners (control) ran overground while EMG of GMED and GMAX was recorded. Three temporal variables were identified via visual inspection of EMG data: (i) onset of muscle activity (onset), (ii) offset of muscle activity (offset), and (iii) duration of muscle activity (duration). A multivariate analysis of covariance with between-subject factor of group (Achilles tendinopathy, control) and variables of onset, offset, and duration was performed for each muscle. Age, weight, and height were included as covariates, and α level was set at 0.05. RESULTS: The Achilles tendinopathy group demonstrated a delay in the activation of the GMED relative to heel strike (P < 0.001) and a shorter duration of activation (P < 0.001) compared to that of the control group. GMED offset time relative to heel strike was not different between the groups (P = 0.063). For GMAX, the Achilles tendinopathy group demonstrated a delay in its onset (P = 0.008), a shorter duration of activation (P = 0.002), and earlier offset (P < 0.001) compared to the control group. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides preliminary evidence of altered neuromotor control of the GMED and GMAX muscles in male runners with Achilles tendinopathy. Although further prospective studies are required to discern the causal nature of this relationship, this study highlights the importance of considering neuromotor control of the gluteal muscles in the assessment and management of patients with Achilles tendinopathy.
Authors: Geoffrey J Dowling; George S Murley; Shannon E Munteanu; Melinda M Franettovich Smith; Bradley S Neal; Ian B Griffiths; Christian J Barton; Natalie J Collins Journal: J Foot Ankle Res Date: 2014-12-19 Impact factor: 2.303
Authors: Arco C van der Vlist; Stephan J Breda; Edwin H G Oei; Jan A N Verhaar; Robert-Jan de Vos Journal: Br J Sports Med Date: 2019-02-04 Impact factor: 13.800
Authors: Steffen Willwacher; Markus Kurz; Johanna Robbin; Matthias Thelen; Joseph Hamill; Luke Kelly; Patrick Mai Journal: Sports Med Date: 2022-03-05 Impact factor: 11.928
Authors: Mathieu Lalumiere; Daniel Bourbonnais; Michel Goyette; Sarah Perrino; François Desmeules; Dany H Gagnon Journal: J Foot Ankle Res Date: 2022-09-07 Impact factor: 3.050