Michael S Rathleff1, Thomas Bandholm2, Kate A McGirr3, Stine I Harring3, Anders S Sørensen4, Kristian Thorborg5. 1. Center for Sensory-Motor Interaction (SMI), Department of Health Science and Technology, Faculty of Medicine, Aalborg University; Department of Occupational and Physiotherapy, Aalborg University Hospital; Research Unit for General Practice and Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University, Aalborg. 2. Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation Research - Copenhagen (PMR-C), Department of Occupational and Physical Therapy, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, and Clinical Research Center, Hvidovre Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen. 3. Center for Sensory-Motor Interaction (SMI), Department of Health Science and Technology, Faculty of Medicine, Aalborg University. 4. The Mærsk Mc-Kinney Møller institute, University of Southern Denmark. 5. Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation Research - Copenhagen (PMR-C), Department of Occupational and Physical Therapy, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, and Clinical Research Center, Hvidovre Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen; Sports Orthopedic Research Center Copenhagen (SORC-C), Arthroscopic Centre Hvidovre, Amager-Hvidovre Hospital, Copenhagen University; Department of Occupational and Physical Therapy, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, and Clinical Research Center, Hvidovre Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Abstract
QUESTION: Is the exercise-integrated Bandcizer™ system feasible for recording exercise dosage (time under tension (TUT) and repetitions) and pain scores among adolescents with patellofemoral pain? Do adolescents practise the exercises as prescribed (TUT and repetitions)? Do adolescents accurately report the exercises they do in an exercise diary? DESIGN: Observational feasibility study. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty adolescents between 15 and 19 years of age with patellofemoral pain. INTERVENTION: Participants were prescribed three exercise sessions per week (one with and two without supervision) for 6 weeks. The exercises included three hip and one knee exercise with an elastic resistance band. Participants were instructed to perform three sets with a predefined TUT (3seconds concentric; 2seconds isometric; 3seconds eccentric; 2seconds pause), equating to 80seconds for 10 repetitions (one set). OUTCOME MEASURES: The exercise-integrated system consisted of a sensor attached to the elastic resistance band that was connected to the Bandtrainer app on an electronic tablet device. Pain intensity was reported on a visual analogue scale on the app. Participants also completed a self-report exercise diary. RESULTS: No major problems were reported with the system. Participants performed 2541 exercise sets during the 6 weeks; 5% were performed with the predefined TUT (ie, within 10seconds of the 80-second target) and 90% were performed below the target TUT. On average, the participants received 15% of the instructed exercise dosage based on TUT. The exercise dosage reported in the exercise diaries was 2.3 times higher than the TUT data from the electronic system. Pain intensity was successfully collected in 100% of the exercise sets. CONCLUSION: The system was feasible for adolescents with patellofemoral pain. The system made it possible to capture detailed data about the TUT, repetitions and sets during home-based exercises together with pain intensity before and after each exercise. [Rathleff MS, Bandholm T, McGirr KA, Harring SI, Sørensen AS, Thorborg K (2016) New exercise-integrated technology can monitor the dosage and quality of exercise performed against an elastic resistance band by adolescents with patellofemoral pain: an observational study.Journal of Physiotherapy62: 159-163].
QUESTION: Is the exercise-integrated Bandcizer™ system feasible for recording exercise dosage (time under tension (TUT) and repetitions) and pain scores among adolescents with patellofemoral pain? Do adolescents practise the exercises as prescribed (TUT and repetitions)? Do adolescents accurately report the exercises they do in an exercise diary? DESIGN: Observational feasibility study. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty adolescents between 15 and 19 years of age with patellofemoral pain. INTERVENTION: Participants were prescribed three exercise sessions per week (one with and two without supervision) for 6 weeks. The exercises included three hip and one knee exercise with an elastic resistance band. Participants were instructed to perform three sets with a predefined TUT (3seconds concentric; 2seconds isometric; 3seconds eccentric; 2seconds pause), equating to 80seconds for 10 repetitions (one set). OUTCOME MEASURES: The exercise-integrated system consisted of a sensor attached to the elastic resistance band that was connected to the Bandtrainer app on an electronic tablet device. Pain intensity was reported on a visual analogue scale on the app. Participants also completed a self-report exercise diary. RESULTS: No major problems were reported with the system. Participants performed 2541 exercise sets during the 6 weeks; 5% were performed with the predefined TUT (ie, within 10seconds of the 80-second target) and 90% were performed below the target TUT. On average, the participants received 15% of the instructed exercise dosage based on TUT. The exercise dosage reported in the exercise diaries was 2.3 times higher than the TUT data from the electronic system. Pain intensity was successfully collected in 100% of the exercise sets. CONCLUSION: The system was feasible for adolescents with patellofemoral pain. The system made it possible to capture detailed data about the TUT, repetitions and sets during home-based exercises together with pain intensity before and after each exercise. [Rathleff MS, Bandholm T, McGirr KA, Harring SI, Sørensen AS, Thorborg K (2016) New exercise-integrated technology can monitor the dosage and quality of exercise performed against an elastic resistance band by adolescents with patellofemoral pain: an observational study.Journal of Physiotherapy62: 159-163].
Authors: Mikkel B Clausen; Mikas B Merrild; Adam Witten; Karl B Christensen; Mette K Zebis; Per Hölmich; Kristian Thorborg Journal: PeerJ Date: 2018-02-23 Impact factor: 2.984
Authors: Mikkel Bek Clausen; Thomas Bandholm; Michael Skovdal Rathleff; Karl Bang Christensen; Mette Kreutzfeldt Zebis; Thomas Graven-Nielsen; Per Hölmich; Kristian Thorborg Journal: Trials Date: 2018-03-02 Impact factor: 2.279