I Komnik1, S Weiss2, C H Fantini Pagani3, W Potthast4. 1. Institute for Biomechanics and Orthopaedics, German Sport University Cologne, Am Sportpark Müngersdorf 6, 50933 Köln, Germany. Electronic address: I.Komnik@dshs-koeln.de. 2. ARCUS Clinics Pforzheim, Rastatter Street 17-19, 75179 Pforzheim, Germany. Electronic address: weiss@sportklinik.de. 3. Institute for Biomechanics and Orthopaedics, German Sport University Cologne, Am Sportpark Müngersdorf 6, 50933 Köln, Germany. Electronic address: c.fantini@dshs-koeln.de. 4. Institute for Biomechanics and Orthopaedics, German Sport University Cologne, Am Sportpark Müngersdorf 6, 50933 Köln, Germany; ARCUS Clinics Pforzheim, Rastatter Street 17-19, 75179 Pforzheim, Germany. Electronic address: potthast@dshs-koeln.de.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Motion analysis with optoelectronic systems is a frequently used method to analyze the patient's gait as well as further relevant activities of daily living before and after knee arthroplasty. The aim of this systematic review was to identify the investigated activities of daily living and to show an extensive presentation of gait analysis studies with patients after knee arthroplasty surgery. METHODS: The articles were searched in electronic databases: MEDPILOT, EMBASE. To identify articles that potentially met the inclusion criteria the titles and abstracts were screened. The level of evidence was analyzed for the included articles. RESULTS: Overall 3989 abstracts were reviewed and 87 full text articles were included. Ten activities of daily living were identified. Level walking was the most frequently investigated activity (78.2%). In 94.6% the sagittal plane kinematics were analyzed and 5.3% presented the results in all three planes. Knee adduction moments were determined in 33.3% of the included articles. At least two joints were investigated in 40.2%, including the impaired knee and further body parts (ankle, hip, pelvis, trunk). Unicondylar knee arthroplasty was addressed in 14.1%. CONCLUSIONS: Besides level walking, it is necessary to examine physical more demanding activities of daily living to detect potential kinematic and kinetic abnormalities. Further research should imply the evaluation of sagittal, frontal and transverse plane joint and muscle function based on accurate inverse-dynamic techniques. More motion analysis studies are necessary that address unicondylar knee arthroplasty in comparison to total knee arthroplasty and healthy controls.
BACKGROUND: Motion analysis with optoelectronic systems is a frequently used method to analyze the patient's gait as well as further relevant activities of daily living before and after knee arthroplasty. The aim of this systematic review was to identify the investigated activities of daily living and to show an extensive presentation of gait analysis studies with patients after knee arthroplasty surgery. METHODS: The articles were searched in electronic databases: MEDPILOT, EMBASE. To identify articles that potentially met the inclusion criteria the titles and abstracts were screened. The level of evidence was analyzed for the included articles. RESULTS: Overall 3989 abstracts were reviewed and 87 full text articles were included. Ten activities of daily living were identified. Level walking was the most frequently investigated activity (78.2%). In 94.6% the sagittal plane kinematics were analyzed and 5.3% presented the results in all three planes. Knee adduction moments were determined in 33.3% of the included articles. At least two joints were investigated in 40.2%, including the impaired knee and further body parts (ankle, hip, pelvis, trunk). Unicondylar knee arthroplasty was addressed in 14.1%. CONCLUSIONS: Besides level walking, it is necessary to examine physical more demanding activities of daily living to detect potential kinematic and kinetic abnormalities. Further research should imply the evaluation of sagittal, frontal and transverse plane joint and muscle function based on accurate inverse-dynamic techniques. More motion analysis studies are necessary that address unicondylar knee arthroplasty in comparison to total knee arthroplasty and healthy controls.
Authors: Marion Mundt; Wolf Thomsen; Tom Witter; Arnd Koeppe; Sina David; Franz Bamer; Wolfgang Potthast; Bernd Markert Journal: Med Biol Eng Comput Date: 2019-12-11 Impact factor: 2.602
Authors: Luis Mendiolagoitia; Miguel Ángel Rodríguez; Irene Crespo; Miguel Del Valle; Hugo Olmedillas Journal: Indian J Orthop Date: 2020-04-16 Impact factor: 1.251
Authors: Igor Komnik; Markus Peters; Johannes Funken; Sina David; Stefan Weiss; Wolfgang Potthast Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-12-21 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Josefine E Naili; Maura D Iversen; Anna-Clara Esbjörnsson; Margareta Hedström; Michael H Schwartz; Charlotte K Häger; Eva W Broström Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2016-07-19 Impact factor: 4.342