| Literature DB >> 35958675 |
Shahnaz Hasan1, Asma Alonazi1, Shahnawaz Anwer2, Azfar Jamal3,4, Suhel Parvez5, Faiz Abdulaziz Saleh Alfaiz6, Heng Li2.
Abstract
Background: The severity of the articular lesion is the single most essential element in investigating the extent of flexion that is required for activities. However, a prior study found no differences in muscle strength gains of quadriceps muscles at different knee angles in people with patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS). Objective: The effects of patellar taping and electromyographic biofeedback (EMG-BF)-guided isometric quadriceps strengthening at different knee angles (e.g., 30°, 60°, and 90° of knee flexion) on quadriceps strength and functional performance in people with PFPS were compared in this single-blind randomized controlled parallel trial.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35958675 PMCID: PMC9359859 DOI: 10.1155/2022/8717932
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pain Res Manag ISSN: 1203-6765 Impact factor: 2.667
Figure 1Participants' flow through each stage of a randomized trial Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) diagram.
Figure 2Participants' position during quadriceps strength measurement.
Figure 3Illustration of single-leg triple hop (SLTH) test.
Figure 4Placements of surface electrodes for electromyographic biofeedback.
Figure 5Maximum voluntary isometric contraction exercises at 30, 60, and 90 degrees of knee flexion angles.
Demographics details.
| Variables | EMG-BF group ( | Control group ( | Independent | 95% CI of differences | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean (SD) | Mean (SD) |
|
| Lower | Upper | |
| Age, years | 26.8 (1.4) | 27.2 (1.4) | −1.890 | 0.060 | −0.818 | 0.018 |
| Height, cm | 1.7 (0.1) | 1.7 (0.2) | 1.891 | 0.060 | −0.00019 | 0.00885 |
| Weight, kg | 69.4 (2.1) | 68.9 (2.0) | 1.329 | 0.186 | −0.194 | 0.994 |
| BMI, kg/m2 | 24.8 (0.7) | 24.8 (0.7) | −0.523 | 0.602 | −0.2547 | 0.1480 |
| Visual analogue scale (VAS), 0–10 cm | ||||||
| Baseline | 7.0 (0.7) | 6.8 (0.7) | 2.206 | 0.029 | 0.025 | 0.442 |
| Posttest | 1.3 (0.8) | 4.5 (0.8) | −27.579 | ≤0.001 | −3.518 | −3.048 |
| Anterior knee pain score (AKP), 0–100 | ||||||
| Baseline | 42.6 (6.7) | 46.1 (7.5) | −3.333 | 0.001 | −5.625 | −1.442 |
| Posttest | 80.4 (5.1) | 69.1 (6.1) | 13.572 | ≤0.001 | 9.657 | 12.943 |
| Single-leg triple hop test (SLTH) | ||||||
| Baseline | 501.3 (53.9) | 499.9 (50.6) | 0.180 | 0.858 | −13.969 | 16.769 |
| Posttest | 540.7 (51.2) | 509.4 (49.8) | 4.165 | ≤0.001 | 16.505 | 46.228 |
Note. BMI, body mass index; SD, standard deviation; EMG-BF, electromyographic biofeedback; CI: confidence interval.
Summary of the results of one-way analyses of variance.
| Variable | EMG-BF | ANOVA | Control | ANOVA | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 30 degrees ( | 60 degrees ( | 90 degrees ( |
|
| 30 degrees ( | 60 degrees ( | 90 degrees ( |
|
| |
| Quadricep strength at baseline (Nm) | 95.1 (10.7) | 158.6 (12.5)‡ | 127.2 (16.5)† | 167.410 | ≤0.001 | 93.9 (13.9) | 133.7 (12.1)‡ | 126.0 (13.5)† | 76.685 | ≤0.001 |
| Quadricep strength at week 6 (Nm) | 117.5 (14.2) | 212.9 (16.2)‡ | 186.9 (24.8)† | 203.517 | ≤0.001 | 104.8 (13.2) | 149.6 (15.3)‡ | 132.5 (16.3)† | 68.051 | ≤0.001 |
Note. ‡Significantly better than 30 and 90 degrees of knee angle group. †Significantly better than 30 degrees of knee angle group. Nm, Newton-meter.
Figure 6Comparison of quadriceps strength at baseline and after training.
Figure 7Comparison of quadriceps strength at different knee angles.
Summary of the results of two-way (2 × 3) repeated measures analyses of variance.
| Dependent variable | Source | Df | Partial |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quadriceps muscle strength (Nm) | Group (EMG-BF vs. control) | 1 | 0.467 | 152.743 | ≤0.001 |
| Conditions (30 vs. 60 vs. 90 degrees of knee flexion) | 2 | 0.765 | 283.021 | ≤0.001 | |
| Group | 2 | 0.228 | 25.655 | ≤0.001 |
Note. Nm, Newton-meter; EMG-BF, electromyographic biofeedback.
Figure 8Comparison of quadriceps strength between training and control groups.
Summary of effect sizes (ES) between two groups.
| Variable | Knee angle (degrees) | EMG-BF | Control | % difference | Es, Cohen's |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quadricep strength at baseline (Nm) | 30 | 95.1 (10.7) | 93.9 (13.9) | 1.27% | 0.11 |
| 60 | 158.6 (12.5) | 133.7 (12.1) | 17.04% | 2.02 | |
| 90 | 127.2 (16.5) | 126.0 (13.5) | 0.95% | 0.08 | |
|
| |||||
| Quadricep strength at week 6 (Nm) | 30 | 117.5 (14.2) | 104.8 (13.2) | 11.43% | 0.93 |
| 60 | 212.9 (16.2) | 149.6 (15.3) | 34.92% | 4.02 | |
| 90 | 186.9 (24.8) | 132.5 (16.3) | 34.06% | 2.59 | |