Dietmar Dammerer1, Johannes M Giesinger2, Rainer Biedermann3, Christian Haid3, Martin Krismer3, Michael Liebensteiner3. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria. Electronic address: dietmar.dammerer@uki.at. 2. Department of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess driving ability (brake response time [BRT]) with commonly used knee braces. METHODS:Sixty-four healthy participants (32 women and 32 men) participated in our study. BRT was assessed using a custom-made driving simulator. We assessed BRT for 5 different commonly used knee braces (right leg) used in 9 different settings: without a knee brace (control group); with a typical postoperative knee brace with adjustable range of motion (ROM) and the settings of 0° to 30°, 0° to 60°, 0° to 90°, and 20° to 90° (extension and flexion); and with an unloading knee brace for moderate to severe unicompartmental osteoarthritis, an orthosis for ligament instabilities, a knee brace for patellofemoral disorders, and an elastic knee bandage. RESULTS: The 64 participants (mean age, 33.5 years) showed significantly impaired BRT with the typical postoperative brace set at an ROM of 0° to 30° (673 milliseconds, P < .001), ROM of 0° to 60° (629 milliseconds, P < .001), ROM of 0° to 90° (607 milliseconds, P = .001), and ROM of 20° to 90° (602 milliseconds, P = .005) compared with the control group. However, no such impaired BRT was found for any other investigated knee brace. CONCLUSIONS:Right-sided ROM-restricting knee braces involve significant impairment of BRT in healthy participants. No such prolonged BRT was found for a patellofemoral realignment brace, a ligament brace, a valgus/osteoarthritis brace, or an elastic knee bandage. However, our findings should be viewed in light of the limitations of the study, which are (1) the lack of a defined decrease in BRT that could lead to an accident and (2) uncertainty of whether the statistical differences are also clinically important. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, lesser-quality randomized controlled trial.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To assess driving ability (brake response time [BRT]) with commonly used knee braces. METHODS: Sixty-four healthy participants (32 women and 32 men) participated in our study. BRT was assessed using a custom-made driving simulator. We assessed BRT for 5 different commonly used knee braces (right leg) used in 9 different settings: without a knee brace (control group); with a typical postoperative knee brace with adjustable range of motion (ROM) and the settings of 0° to 30°, 0° to 60°, 0° to 90°, and 20° to 90° (extension and flexion); and with an unloading knee brace for moderate to severe unicompartmental osteoarthritis, an orthosis for ligament instabilities, a knee brace for patellofemoral disorders, and an elastic knee bandage. RESULTS: The 64 participants (mean age, 33.5 years) showed significantly impaired BRT with the typical postoperative brace set at an ROM of 0° to 30° (673 milliseconds, P < .001), ROM of 0° to 60° (629 milliseconds, P < .001), ROM of 0° to 90° (607 milliseconds, P = .001), and ROM of 20° to 90° (602 milliseconds, P = .005) compared with the control group. However, no such impaired BRT was found for any other investigated knee brace. CONCLUSIONS: Right-sided ROM-restricting knee braces involve significant impairment of BRT in healthy participants. No such prolonged BRT was found for a patellofemoral realignment brace, a ligament brace, a valgus/osteoarthritis brace, or an elastic knee bandage. However, our findings should be viewed in light of the limitations of the study, which are (1) the lack of a defined decrease in BRT that could lead to an accident and (2) uncertainty of whether the statistical differences are also clinically important. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, lesser-quality randomized controlled trial.
Authors: Jakob Rodseth; Edward P Washabaugh; Ali Al Haddad; Paula Kartje; Denise G Tate; Chandramouli Krishnan Journal: Appl Ergon Date: 2017-07-29 Impact factor: 3.661
Authors: Kevin J DiSilvestro; Adam J Santoro; Fotios P Tjoumakaris; Eric A Levicoff; Kevin B Freedman Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2016-08-04 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: D Latz; E Schiffner; J Schneppendahl; B H Thalmann; P Jungbluth; J Grassmann; J Windolf; S V Gehrmann Journal: Unfallchirurg Date: 2019-09 Impact factor: 1.000
Authors: Dietmar Dammerer; Matthias Braito; Rainer Biedermann; Michael Ban; Johannes Giesinger; Christian Haid; Michael C Liebensteiner; Gerhard Kaufmann Journal: J Orthop Surg Res Date: 2016-01-20 Impact factor: 2.359