Forskning
Udskriv Udskriv
Switch language
Region Hovedstaden - en del af Københavns Universitetshospital
Udgivet

Assessment of objective dynamic knee joint control in anterior cruciate ligament deficient and reconstructed individuals

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Harvard

APA

CBE

MLA

Vancouver

Author

Smale, Kenneth B ; Alkjaer, Tine ; Flaxman, Teresa E ; Krogsgaard, Michael R ; Simonsen, Erik B ; Benoit, Daniel L. / Assessment of objective dynamic knee joint control in anterior cruciate ligament deficient and reconstructed individuals. I: The Knee. 2019 ; Bind 26, Nr. 3. s. 578-585.

Bibtex

@article{83751ac79efe4575a1149d6332d1b8be,
title = "Assessment of objective dynamic knee joint control in anterior cruciate ligament deficient and reconstructed individuals",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: There is a lack of objective dynamic knee joint control measures that can be related to the status of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL). The purpose of this study was to introduce two novel measures and apply a third to determine how dynamic knee joint control changes in relation to ACL status during dynamic movements.METHODS: Twenty patients (13 male) were tested pre- (ACLd) and 10-months post- (ACLr) ACL reconstructive surgery and matched to an uninjured participant (CON). Kinetic and kinematic data were synchronously recorded with a force platform and motion capture system. Three objective control measures including dynamic angular stiffness, knee joint center excursion (KJCE), and knee joint center boundary (KJCB) were assessed for each participant when completing the side cut and hop tasks.RESULTS: During the side cut, stiffness was found to be significantly lower in ACLd (0.06 ± 0.01 Nm/kg/°) and ACLr (0.07 ± 0.02 Nm/kg/°) compared to CON (0.08 ± 0.02 Nm/kg/°), while there were no differences in stiffness during the hop. No significant differences were observed in the KJCE during the side cut, while KJCE was significantly greater (p = 0.006) during the hop in CON compared to the ACLd. There were no differences in KJCB.CONCLUSIONS: These high-functioning ACL injured in both ACLd and ACLr phases, aside from reduced stiffness, were able to complete both tasks with similar dynamic control as the CON. Although improvements in self-perceived control between ACLd and ACLr have been observed, this lack of improvement in objective control demonstrates a gap between a patient's self-efficacy and the level of control.",
keywords = "Adult, Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries/physiopathology, Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction, Biomechanical Phenomena/physiology, Female, Humans, Kinetics, Knee Joint/physiopathology, Male, Matched-Pair Analysis, Self Efficacy",
author = "Smale, {Kenneth B} and Tine Alkjaer and Flaxman, {Teresa E} and Krogsgaard, {Michael R} and Simonsen, {Erik B} and Benoit, {Daniel L}",
note = "Copyright {\textcopyright} 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.",
year = "2019",
month = jun,
doi = "10.1016/j.knee.2019.02.013",
language = "English",
volume = "26",
pages = "578--585",
journal = "Knee",
issn = "0968-0160",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",
number = "3",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Assessment of objective dynamic knee joint control in anterior cruciate ligament deficient and reconstructed individuals

AU - Smale, Kenneth B

AU - Alkjaer, Tine

AU - Flaxman, Teresa E

AU - Krogsgaard, Michael R

AU - Simonsen, Erik B

AU - Benoit, Daniel L

N1 - Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

PY - 2019/6

Y1 - 2019/6

N2 - BACKGROUND: There is a lack of objective dynamic knee joint control measures that can be related to the status of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL). The purpose of this study was to introduce two novel measures and apply a third to determine how dynamic knee joint control changes in relation to ACL status during dynamic movements.METHODS: Twenty patients (13 male) were tested pre- (ACLd) and 10-months post- (ACLr) ACL reconstructive surgery and matched to an uninjured participant (CON). Kinetic and kinematic data were synchronously recorded with a force platform and motion capture system. Three objective control measures including dynamic angular stiffness, knee joint center excursion (KJCE), and knee joint center boundary (KJCB) were assessed for each participant when completing the side cut and hop tasks.RESULTS: During the side cut, stiffness was found to be significantly lower in ACLd (0.06 ± 0.01 Nm/kg/°) and ACLr (0.07 ± 0.02 Nm/kg/°) compared to CON (0.08 ± 0.02 Nm/kg/°), while there were no differences in stiffness during the hop. No significant differences were observed in the KJCE during the side cut, while KJCE was significantly greater (p = 0.006) during the hop in CON compared to the ACLd. There were no differences in KJCB.CONCLUSIONS: These high-functioning ACL injured in both ACLd and ACLr phases, aside from reduced stiffness, were able to complete both tasks with similar dynamic control as the CON. Although improvements in self-perceived control between ACLd and ACLr have been observed, this lack of improvement in objective control demonstrates a gap between a patient's self-efficacy and the level of control.

AB - BACKGROUND: There is a lack of objective dynamic knee joint control measures that can be related to the status of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL). The purpose of this study was to introduce two novel measures and apply a third to determine how dynamic knee joint control changes in relation to ACL status during dynamic movements.METHODS: Twenty patients (13 male) were tested pre- (ACLd) and 10-months post- (ACLr) ACL reconstructive surgery and matched to an uninjured participant (CON). Kinetic and kinematic data were synchronously recorded with a force platform and motion capture system. Three objective control measures including dynamic angular stiffness, knee joint center excursion (KJCE), and knee joint center boundary (KJCB) were assessed for each participant when completing the side cut and hop tasks.RESULTS: During the side cut, stiffness was found to be significantly lower in ACLd (0.06 ± 0.01 Nm/kg/°) and ACLr (0.07 ± 0.02 Nm/kg/°) compared to CON (0.08 ± 0.02 Nm/kg/°), while there were no differences in stiffness during the hop. No significant differences were observed in the KJCE during the side cut, while KJCE was significantly greater (p = 0.006) during the hop in CON compared to the ACLd. There were no differences in KJCB.CONCLUSIONS: These high-functioning ACL injured in both ACLd and ACLr phases, aside from reduced stiffness, were able to complete both tasks with similar dynamic control as the CON. Although improvements in self-perceived control between ACLd and ACLr have been observed, this lack of improvement in objective control demonstrates a gap between a patient's self-efficacy and the level of control.

KW - Adult

KW - Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries/physiopathology

KW - Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

KW - Biomechanical Phenomena/physiology

KW - Female

KW - Humans

KW - Kinetics

KW - Knee Joint/physiopathology

KW - Male

KW - Matched-Pair Analysis

KW - Self Efficacy

U2 - 10.1016/j.knee.2019.02.013

DO - 10.1016/j.knee.2019.02.013

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 30954334

VL - 26

SP - 578

EP - 585

JO - Knee

JF - Knee

SN - 0968-0160

IS - 3

ER -

ID: 58973151