Mechanical Engineering - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 3 of 3
-
ItemDynamic foot function as a risk factor for lower limb overuse injury: a systematic review(BioMed Central, 2014)BACKGROUND:Dynamic foot function is considered a risk factor for lower limb overuse injuries including Achilles tendinopathy, shin pain, patellofemoral pain and stress fractures. However, no single source has systematically appraised and summarised the literature to evaluate this proposed relationship. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate dynamic foot function as a risk factor for lower limb overuse injury.METHODS:A systematic search was performed using Medline, CINAHL, Embase and SportDiscus in April 2014 to identify prospective cohort studies that utilised dynamic methods of foot assessment. Included studies underwent methodological quality appraisal by two independent reviewers using an adapted version of the Epidemiological Appraisal Instrument (EAI). Effects were expressed as standardised mean differences (SMD) for continuous scaled data, and risk ratios (RR) for nominal scaled data.RESULTS:Twelve studies were included (total n=3,773; EAI 0.44 to 1.20 out of 2.00, representing low to moderate quality). There was limited to very limited evidence for forefoot, midfoot and rearfoot plantar loading variables (SMD 0.47 to 0.85) and rearfoot kinematic variables (RR 2.67 to 3.43) as risk factors for patellofemoral pain; and plantar loading variables (forefoot, midfoot, rearfoot) as risk factors for Achilles tendinopathy (SMD 0.81 to 1.08). While there were significant findings from individual studies for plantar loading variables (SMD 0.3 to 0.84) and rearfoot kinematic variables (SMD 0.29 to 0.62) as risk factors for ’non-specific lower limb overuse injuries’, these were often conflicting regarding different anatomical regions of the foot. Findings from three studies indicated no evidence that dynamic foot function is a risk factor for iliotibial band syndrome or lower limb stress fractures.CONCLUSION:This systematic review identified very limited evidence that dynamic foot function during walking and running is a risk factor for patellofemoral pain, Achilles tendinopathy, and non-specific lower limb overuse injuries. It is unclear whether these risk factors can be identified clinically (without sophisticated equipment), or modified to prevent or manage these injuries. Future prospective cohort studies should address methodological limitations, avoid grouping different lower limb overuse injuries, and explore clinically meaningful representations of dynamic foot function.
-
ItemFoot posture as a risk factor for lower limb overuse injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis(BMC, 2014-12-19)BACKGROUND: Static measures of foot posture are regularly used as part of a clinical examination to determine the need for foot level interventions. This is based on the premise that pronated and supinated foot postures may be risk factors for or associated with lower limb injury. This systematic review and meta-analysis investigates foot posture (measured statically) as a potential risk factor for lower limb overuse injuries. METHODS: A systematic search was performed using Medline, CINAHL, Embase, SportDiscus in April 2014, to identify prospective cohort studies that investigated foot posture and function as a risk factor for lower limb overuse injury. Eligible studies were classified based on the method of foot assessment: (i) static foot posture assessment; and/or (ii) dynamic foot function assessment. This review presents studies evaluating static foot posture. The methodological quality of included studies was evaluated by two independent reviewers, using an adapted version of the Epidemiological Appraisal Instrument (EAI). Where possible, effects were expressed as standardised mean differences (SMD) for continuous scaled data, and risk ratios (RR) for nominal scaled data. Meta-analysis was performed where injuries and outcomes were considered homogenous. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies were included (total n = 6,228; EAI 0.8 to 1.7 out of 2.0). There was strong evidence that a pronated foot posture was a risk factor for medial tibial stress syndrome (MTSS) development and very limited evidence that a pronated foot posture was a risk factor for patellofemoral pain development, although associated effect sizes were small (0.28 to 0.33). No relationship was identified between a pronated foot posture and any other evaluated pathology (i.e. foot/ankle injury, bone stress reactions and non-specific lower limb overuse injury). CONCLUSION: This systematic review identified strong and very limited evidence of small effect that a pronated foot posture is a risk factor for MTSS and patellofemoral pain respectively. Evaluation of static foot posture should be included in a multifactorial assessment for both MTSS and patellofemoral pain, although only as a part of the potential injury risk profile. Whilst the included measures are clinically applicable, further studies are required to determine their relationship with dynamic foot function.
-
ItemAre Knee Biomechanics Different in Those With and Without Patellofemoral Osteoarthritis After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction?(WILEY-BLACKWELL, 2014-10)OBJECTIVE: Patellofemoral (PF) osteoarthritis (OA) is prevalent following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). This study aimed to investigate differences in transverse plane rotation between knees with varus and valgus alignment during gait in people with and without PFOA after ACLR. METHODS: Thirty-six individuals who were mean ± SD 9 ± 2 years post-ACLR (18 radiographic PFOA and 18 no knee OA) participated in this cross-sectional study. Knee internal-external rotation angles were measured using a 3-dimensional motion analysis system during walking and running. Weight-bearing frontal plane knee alignment, measured with an inclinometer, was used to classify participants as having varus or valgus alignment. Two-way analysis of covariance was used to assess the effect of both PFOA and frontal plane knee alignment on dynamic knee internal-external rotation. RESULTS: Significant interactions were found between PFOA status and frontal plane alignment on knee internal-external rotation angles during walking (P = 0.019) and running (P = 0.002). Tests of simple effects revealed that during walking, individuals with valgus alignment and PFOA demonstrated a mean 3.9° (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.7, 7.1) less knee internal rotation than those with valgus alignment and no OA. During running this difference increased to 6.1° (95% CI 1.8, 10.4). For individuals with varus alignment, no significant effects were observed. CONCLUSION: Less knee internal rotation during gait was found in individuals with PFOA and valgus alignment. A rotational shift of this magnitude may be sufficient to initiate or accelerate patellofemoral cartilage degeneration. Prospective studies are required to determine if these altered kinematic patterns result from, or contribute to, PFOA development after reconstruction.