| Literature DB >> 30356529 |
Qingguang Zhu1,2, Lingyan Huang1, Xie Wu1, Lin Wang1, Yunya Zhang1, Min Fang2, Yu Liu1, Jing Xian Li1,3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although Tai Ji Quan has been shown to relieve pain and improve functional mobility in people with knee osteoarthritis (OA), little is known about its potential benefits on gait characteristics among older Chinese women who have a high prevalence of both radiographic and symptomatic knee OA. This study aims to assess the efficacy of a tailored Tai Ji Quan intervention on gait kinematics for older Chinese women with knee OA.Entities:
Keywords: Gait; Pain; Physical function; Rheumatic diseases; Tai Chi Quan
Year: 2016 PMID: 30356529 PMCID: PMC6188600 DOI: 10.1016/j.jshs.2016.02.003
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Sport Health Sci ISSN: 2213-2961 Impact factor: 7.179
Fig. 1Flow chart for study participation.
Baseline characteristics of the study participants.
| Measure | Tai Ji Quan ( | Control ( |
|---|---|---|
| Age (year, mean ± SD) | 64.61 ± 3.40 | 64.53 ± 3.43 |
| Body mass index (mean ± SD) | 25.23 ± 3.46 | 25.05 ± 3.42 |
| Education ( | ||
| Primary | 15(66) | 14(61) |
| Secondary | 4(17) | 4(17) |
| College/university | 4(17) | 5(22) |
| Duration of knee pain(month, mean ± SD) | 22 ± 13 | 22 ± 12 |
| Self-reported coexisting illness( | ||
| Neck pain | 2(9) | 3(13) |
| Low back pain | 4(17) | 3(13) |
| Heart disease | 1(4) | 0 |
| Hypertension | 7(30) | 8(34) |
| Radiographic severity of knee( | ||
| K/L grade 1 | 7(30) | 6(26) |
| K/L grade 2 | 12(52) | 14(61) |
| K/L grade 3 | 4(17) | 3(13) |
Abbreviation: K/L = Kellgren/Lawrence.
Changes in gait kinematics from baseline to the 24-week follow-up (mean ± SD).
| Variable | Group | Baseline | 24 weeks | Within group | Between group | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Effect size (95%CI) | Effect size (95%CI) | ||||||
| Gait velocity (cm/s) | TG | 135.72 ± 12.98 | 140.24 ± 11.82 | 4.52(0.52–8.52) | 0.029 | 8.40(1.62–15.18) | 0.01 |
| CG | 130.34 ± 10.93 | 131.84 ± 10.98 | 1.50(−2.14to5.16) | 0.401 | |||
| Step length | TG | 65.61 ± 4.49 | 67.39 ± 3.95 | 1.78(0.70–2.87) | 0.002 | 3.52(1.21–5.83) | 0.004 |
| CG | 63.65 ± 2.87 | 63.87 ± 3.83 | 0.22(−1.03to1.47) | 0.722 | |||
| Initial contact angle of knee joint | TG | 2.56 ± 3.10 | 5.23 ± 2.50 | 2.67(1.30–4.03) | 0.001 | 2.19(0.52–3.87) | 0.012 |
| CG | 2.64 ± 3.61 | 3.04 ± 3.11 | 0.39(−0.08to0.87) | 0.102 | |||
| Maximal angle of knee joint | TG | 18.01 ± 3.65 | 21.03 ± 2.78 | 3.02(1.93–4.11) | <0.001 | 2.61(0.97–4.24) | 0.003 |
| CG | 17.55 ± 3.66 | 18.42 ± 2.74 | 0.87(0.26–1.49) | 0.008 | |||
Abbreviations: CG = control group; CI = confidence interval; TG = Tai Ji Quan group.
The distance between the point of initial contact of one foot and that of the opposite foot.
Measured at the moment when the foot strikes the ground.
Measured for the maximal angle for 1 leg during the stance phase.
Changes in secondary outcome measures of WOMAC and SPPB from baseline to the 24-week follow-up (point, mean ± SD).
| Variable | Group | Baseline | 24 weeks | Within group | Between group | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Effect size (95%CI) | Effect size (95%CI) | ||||||
| WOMAC-pain | TG | 8.46 ± 4.90 | 5.15 ± 3.24 | −3.30(−4.62to−1.99) | <0.001 | −4.22(−6.80to−1.63) | 0.002 |
| CG | 9.65 ± 5.64 | 9.37 ± 5.23 | −0.28(−1.78to1.21) | 0.699 | |||
| WOMAC-stiffness | TG | 3.57 ± 2.69 | 1.76 ± 1.32 | −1.80(−2.42to−1.19) | <0.001 | −2.41(−3.70to−1.13) | <0.001 |
| CG | 4.76 ± 3.00 | 4.17 ± 2.75 | −0.59(−1.10to−0.08) | 0.025 | |||
| WOMAC-functional limitation | TG | 24.70 ± 12.95 | 15.85 ± 7.60 | −8.85(−12.38to−5.31) | <0.001 | −11.04(−18.70to−3.39) | 0.006 |
| CG | 25.37 ± 14.64 | 26.89 ± 16.56 | −1.52(−3.30to−6.34) | 0.519 | |||
| SPPB | TG | 9.00 ± 0.60 | 11.09 ± 0.90 | 2.09(1.64–2.54) | <0.001 | 1.22(0.7–1.73) | <0.001 |
| CG | 9.22 ± 1.00 | 9.87 ± 0.82 | 0.65(0.25–1.06) | 0.003 | |||
Abbreviations: CI = confidence interval; WOMAC = Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index; SPPB = Short Physical Performance Battery; TG = Tai Ji Quan group; CG = control group.
Ranged from 0 to 10 for each question; a total of 5 pain questions, with higher scores indicating greater pain.
Ranged from 0 to 10 for each question; a total of 2 stiffness questions, with higher scores indicating greater stiffness.
Ranged from 0 to 10 for each question; a total of 17 functional limitation questions, with higher scores indicating worse physical performance.
Higher scores indicate better physical performance.