OBJECTIVE: To identify latent subgroups among patients with Achilles tendinopathy, describe patient characteristics and clinical attributes that defined each subgroup, and develop a clinical classification model for subgroup membership. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. METHODS: One hundred forty-five participants (men, n = 73; mean ± SD age, 51 ± 14 years) with clinically diagnosed Achilles tendinopathy completed a baseline evaluation, including demographics and medical history, patient-reported outcome measures, a clinical exam, tendon structure measures via ultrasound imaging and continuous shear-wave elastography, and a functional test battery. Subgroups were identified using mixture modeling. We compared the subgroups using a 1-way analysis-of-variance or chi-square test and the Tukey post hoc test to identify defining attributes. We developed a clinical classification model using logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic curves. RESULTS: Three latent subgroups were identified and named by their distinctive patient characteristics and clinical attributes. The activity-dominant subgroup (n = 67), on average, had the highest physical activity level, function, and quality of life; reported mild symptoms; and was the youngest. The psychosocial-dominant subgroup (n = 56), on average, had the worst symptoms, impaired function, heightened psychological factors, the poorest quality of life, minimal tendon structural alterations, and was obese and predominantly female. The structure-dominant subgroup (n = 22), on average, had the most tendon structural alterations, severe functional deficits, moderate symptoms and psychological factors, reduced quality of life, and was the oldest, obese, and predominantly male. The clinical classification model correctly classified 85% (123/145) of participants. CONCLUSION: Three Achilles tendinopathy subgroups (activity dominant, psychosocial dominant, and structure dominant) differed in patient characteristics and clinical attributes. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2021;51(9):440-448. Epub 1 Jun 2021. doi:10.2519/jospt.2021.10271.
OBJECTIVE: To identify latent subgroups among patients with Achilles tendinopathy, describe patient characteristics and clinical attributes that defined each subgroup, and develop a clinical classification model for subgroup membership. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. METHODS: One hundred forty-five participants (men, n = 73; mean ± SD age, 51 ± 14 years) with clinically diagnosed Achilles tendinopathy completed a baseline evaluation, including demographics and medical history, patient-reported outcome measures, a clinical exam, tendon structure measures via ultrasound imaging and continuous shear-wave elastography, and a functional test battery. Subgroups were identified using mixture modeling. We compared the subgroups using a 1-way analysis-of-variance or chi-square test and the Tukey post hoc test to identify defining attributes. We developed a clinical classification model using logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic curves. RESULTS: Three latent subgroups were identified and named by their distinctive patient characteristics and clinical attributes. The activity-dominant subgroup (n = 67), on average, had the highest physical activity level, function, and quality of life; reported mild symptoms; and was the youngest. The psychosocial-dominant subgroup (n = 56), on average, had the worst symptoms, impaired function, heightened psychological factors, the poorest quality of life, minimal tendon structural alterations, and was obese and predominantly female. The structure-dominant subgroup (n = 22), on average, had the most tendon structural alterations, severe functional deficits, moderate symptoms and psychological factors, reduced quality of life, and was the oldest, obese, and predominantly male. The clinical classification model correctly classified 85% (123/145) of participants. CONCLUSION: Three Achilles tendinopathy subgroups (activity dominant, psychosocial dominant, and structure dominant) differed in patient characteristics and clinical attributes. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2021;51(9):440-448. Epub 1 Jun 2021. doi:10.2519/jospt.2021.10271.
Authors: Suzan de Jonge; Johannes L Tol; Adam Weir; Jan H Waarsing; Jan A N Verhaar; Robert-Jan de Vos Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2015-10-13 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Daniel H Cortes; Stephen M Suydam; Karin Grävare Silbernagel; Thomas S Buchanan; Dawn M Elliott Journal: Ultrasound Med Biol Date: 2015-03-19 Impact factor: 2.998
Authors: Bas Habets; Anke G van den Broek; Bionka M A Huisstede; Frank J G Backx; Robert E H van Cingel Journal: Sports Med Date: 2018-03 Impact factor: 11.136
Authors: Nathan Edgar; Christopher Clifford; Seth O'Neill; Carles Pedret; Paul Kirwan; Neal L Millar Journal: BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med Date: 2022-08-01