Benjamin R Freedman1, Timothy J Brindle2, Frances T Sheehan3. 1. Functional and Applied Biomechanics, Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA; Department of Bioengineering, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Electronic address: bfreed@seas.upenn.edu. 2. Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation Science, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA. 3. Functional and Applied Biomechanics, Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Q-angle is widely used clinically to evaluate individuals with anterior knee pain. Recent studies have questioned the utility of this measure and have suggested that a large Q-angle may not be associated with lateral patellofemoral translation, as often assumed. The objective of this study was to determine: 1) how accurately the Q-angle represents the line-of-action of the quadriceps and 2) if adding active quadriceps contraction or a bent knee position to the measurement of the Q-angle improves its reliability, accuracy, and association with patellofemoral kinematics. METHODS: The study included individuals diagnosed with chronic idiopathic patellofemoral pain and control subjects (n=43 and n=30 knees). Three measures of the clinical Q-angle (straight- and bent-knee with relaxed quadriceps and straight-knee with maximum isometric quadriceps contraction) were obtained with a goniometer and compared to a fourth MR-based measure of Q-angle. Patellofemoral kinematics were derived from dynamic cine-phase contrast images, acquired while subjects extended/flexed their knee from approximately 0° and 45°. FINDINGS: The Q-angle did not represent the line-of-action of the quadriceps. The average difference between each clinical and the MR-based Q-angle ranged from 5° to 8°. These differences varied greatly across subjects (range: -28.5° to 3.9(o)). Adding an active quadriceps contraction or a bent knee position, did not improve the reliability of the Q-angle. An increased Q-angle correlated to medial patellar displacement and tilt (r=0.38-0.54, P<0.001) in the cohort with anterior knee pain. INTERPRETATION: Clinicians are cautioned against using the Q-angle to infer patellofemoral kinematics.
BACKGROUND: The Q-angle is widely used clinically to evaluate individuals with anterior knee pain. Recent studies have questioned the utility of this measure and have suggested that a large Q-angle may not be associated with lateral patellofemoral translation, as often assumed. The objective of this study was to determine: 1) how accurately the Q-angle represents the line-of-action of the quadriceps and 2) if adding active quadriceps contraction or a bent knee position to the measurement of the Q-angle improves its reliability, accuracy, and association with patellofemoral kinematics. METHODS: The study included individuals diagnosed with chronic idiopathic patellofemoral pain and control subjects (n=43 and n=30 knees). Three measures of the clinical Q-angle (straight- and bent-knee with relaxed quadriceps and straight-knee with maximum isometric quadriceps contraction) were obtained with a goniometer and compared to a fourth MR-based measure of Q-angle. Patellofemoral kinematics were derived from dynamic cine-phase contrast images, acquired while subjects extended/flexed their knee from approximately 0° and 45°. FINDINGS: The Q-angle did not represent the line-of-action of the quadriceps. The average difference between each clinical and the MR-based Q-angle ranged from 5° to 8°. These differences varied greatly across subjects (range: -28.5° to 3.9(o)). Adding an active quadriceps contraction or a bent knee position, did not improve the reliability of the Q-angle. An increased Q-angle correlated to medial patellar displacement and tilt (r=0.38-0.54, P<0.001) in the cohort with anterior knee pain. INTERPRETATION: Clinicians are cautioned against using the Q-angle to infer patellofemoral kinematics.
Authors: Christine E Draper; Kelvin T L Chew; Roberta Wang; Fabio Jennings; Garry E Gold; Michael Fredericson Journal: PM R Date: 2011-02 Impact factor: 2.298
Authors: L L Johnson; G E van Dyk; J R Green; A W Pittsley; B Bays; S M Gully; J M Phillips Journal: Arthroscopy Date: 1998 May-Jun Impact factor: 4.772
Authors: Frances T Sheehan; Aditya Derasari; Kenneth M Fine; Timothy J Brindle; Katharine E Alter Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2009-05-09 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Kristin H Graf; Marc A Tompkins; Julie Agel; Elizabeth A Arendt Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2017-04-04 Impact factor: 4.342