Seán McAuliffe1, Ariane Tabuena2, Karen McCreesh2, Mary O'Keeffe2, John Hurley2, Tom Comyns3, Helen Purtill4, Seth O'Neill5, Kieran O'Sullivan1,2. 1. Aspetar Orthopaedic and Sports Medicine Hospital, Doha, Qatar. 2. School of Allied Health, University of Limerick, Ireland. 3. Department of Physical Education and Sports Science, University of Limerick, Ireland. 4. Department of Mathematics & Statistics, University of Limerick, Ireland. 5. Department of Medical & Social Care Education, University of Leicester, United Kingdom.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Persistent strength deficits secondary to Achilles tendinopathy (AT) have been postulated to account for difficulty engaging in tendon-loading movements, such as running and jumping, and may contribute to the increased risk of recurrence. To date, little consensus exists on the presence of strength deficits in AT. Consequently, researchers are uncertain about the appropriate methods of assessment that may inform rehabilitation in clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and synthesize the literature investigating plantar-flexion (PF) strength in individuals with AT. STUDY SELECTION: Two independent reviewers searched 9 electronic databases using an agreed-upon set of key words. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were extracted from studies comparing strength measures (maximal, reactive, and explosive strength) between individuals with AT and healthy control participants or between the injured and uninjured sides of people with AT. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme Case-Control Study Checklist was used to assess the risk of bias for the included studies. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 19 studies were eligible. Pooled meta-analyses for isokinetic dynamometry demonstrated reductions in maximal strength (concentric PF peak torque [PT] slow [Hedges g = 0.52, 44% deficit], concentric PF PT fast [Hedges g = 0.61, 38% deficit], and eccentric PF PT slow [Hedges g = 0.26, 18% deficit]). Reactive strength, particularly during hopping, was also reduced (Hedges g range = 0.32-2.61, 16%-35% deficit). For explosive strength, reductions in the rate of force development (Hedges g range = 0.31-1.73, 10%-21% deficit) were observed, whereas the findings for ground reaction force varied but were not consistently altered. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with AT demonstrated strength deficits compared with the uninjured side or with asymptomatic control participants. Deficits were reported across the strength spectrum for maximal, reactive, and explosive strength. Clinicians and researchers may need to adapt their assessment of Achilles tendon function, which may ultimately help to optimize rehabilitation outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Persistent strength deficits secondary to Achilles tendinopathy (AT) have been postulated to account for difficulty engaging in tendon-loading movements, such as running and jumping, and may contribute to the increased risk of recurrence. To date, little consensus exists on the presence of strength deficits in AT. Consequently, researchers are uncertain about the appropriate methods of assessment that may inform rehabilitation in clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and synthesize the literature investigating plantar-flexion (PF) strength in individuals with AT. STUDY SELECTION: Two independent reviewers searched 9 electronic databases using an agreed-upon set of key words. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were extracted from studies comparing strength measures (maximal, reactive, and explosive strength) between individuals with AT and healthy control participants or between the injured and uninjured sides of people with AT. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme Case-Control Study Checklist was used to assess the risk of bias for the included studies. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 19 studies were eligible. Pooled meta-analyses for isokinetic dynamometry demonstrated reductions in maximal strength (concentric PF peak torque [PT] slow [Hedges g = 0.52, 44% deficit], concentric PF PT fast [Hedges g = 0.61, 38% deficit], and eccentric PF PT slow [Hedges g = 0.26, 18% deficit]). Reactive strength, particularly during hopping, was also reduced (Hedges g range = 0.32-2.61, 16%-35% deficit). For explosive strength, reductions in the rate of force development (Hedges g range = 0.31-1.73, 10%-21% deficit) were observed, whereas the findings for ground reaction force varied but were not consistently altered. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with AT demonstrated strength deficits compared with the uninjured side or with asymptomatic control participants. Deficits were reported across the strength spectrum for maximal, reactive, and explosive strength. Clinicians and researchers may need to adapt their assessment of Achilles tendon function, which may ultimately help to optimize rehabilitation outcomes.
Authors: Michael J Yelland; Kent R Sweeting; John A Lyftogt; Shu Kay Ng; Paul A Scuffham; Kerrie A Evans Journal: Br J Sports Med Date: 2009-06-22 Impact factor: 13.800
Authors: A van der Plas; S de Jonge; R J de Vos; H J L van der Heide; J A N Verhaar; A Weir; J L Tol Journal: Br J Sports Med Date: 2011-11-10 Impact factor: 13.800
Authors: Bas Habets; Robert E H van Cingel; Frank J G Backx; Bionka M A Huisstede Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2017-07-11 Impact factor: 2.362
Authors: Katja Maria Heinemeier; Peter Schjerling; Jan Heinemeier; Stig Peter Magnusson; Michael Kjaer Journal: FASEB J Date: 2013-02-11 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Sabah N Rezvani; Anne E C Nichols; Robert W Grange; Linda A Dahlgren; P Gunnar Brolinson; Vincent M Wang Journal: J Appl Physiol (1985) Date: 2021-02-11
Authors: Kohle Merry; Christopher Napier; Vivian Chung; Brett C Hannigan; Megan MacPherson; Carlo Menon; Alex Scott Journal: Sensors (Basel) Date: 2021-12-16 Impact factor: 3.576
Authors: Mathieu Lalumiere; Sarah Perrino; Marie-Josée Nadeau; Christian Larivière; Martin Lamontagne; François Desmeules; Dany H Gagnon Journal: Front Rehabil Sci Date: 2021-08-12