Concurrent validity and test-retest reliability of VALD ForceDecks' strength, balance, and movement assessment tests.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the concurrent validity and test-retest reliability of common movement, strength, and balance tests using portable uniaxial dual force plates. DESIGN: Repeated measures cross-sectional study. METHODS: Sixteen healthy individuals participated in two testing sessions, where they performed 12 different movement, strength, and balance tests. Vertical ground reaction force and centre of pressure data were collected using the VALD ForceDecks simultaneously with ground-embedded laboratory force plates. Concurrent validity was assessed using root mean square error for raw time-series data and Bland-Altman plots for discrete metrics. Test-retest reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients and minimal detectable changes. RESULTS: ForceDecks recorded vertical ground reaction forces and center of pressure with high accuracy compared to laboratory force plates. The mean bias between systems was negligible (<2 N or 0.1 mm), with small limits of agreement (<5 N or 1 mm). Overall, 530/674 (79%) showed good or excellent validity (<10% difference) and 611/773 (79%) had good or excellent reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient >0.75). ForceDecks reliability was similar to laboratory force plates (<0.07 intraclass correlation coefficient median difference for all metrics). CONCLUSIONS: Portable uniaxial force plates record highly accurate vertical ground reaction forces and center of pressure during a range of movement, strength, and balance tests. The VALD ForcDecks are a valid and reliable alternative to laboratory force plates when strict standardized testing and data analysis procedures are followed. Users should be aware of the validity and reliability characteristics of the tests and metrics they choose.

Injury Prevention Programmes Fail to Change Most Lower Limb Kinematics and Kinetics in Female Team Field and Court Sports: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: One mechanism by which exercise interventions may be effective in reducing anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury risk is through changes in lower limb biomechanics. Understanding how training programmes affect lower-limb kinematics and kinetics may help refine injury prevention programmes. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the effect of injury prevention programmes on kinematics and kinetics during tasks related to ACL injury in female team field and court sports. DATA SOURCES: Five databases were searched in October 2022. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials assessing the effect of injury prevention programmes compared with usual training/no training on lower limb kinematics and kinetics in female team field and court sports were eligible for review. RESULTS: Sixteen studies were included. A total of 976 female athletes were included. Most of the studies included interventions with multiple components (12/16). Commonly used components were plyometrics (12/16), strength (8/16), and balance/stability (7/16). Thirteen studies had routine training or sham interventions as the control group and three studies had no training. Very low certainty evidence suggests that injury prevention programmes increase knee flexion angles (mean difference = 3.1° [95% confidence interval 0.8-5.5]); however, very low to low certainty evidence suggests no effect on hip flexion angles/moments, knee flexion moments, hip adduction angles/moments, knee adduction angles/moments, hip internal rotation angles/moments, ankle dorsiflexion angles, and ground reaction forces, compared with usual training/no training. CONCLUSION: Injury prevention programmes may be effective in increasing knee flexion angles during dynamic landing and cutting tasks but may have no effect on other lower limb biomechanical variables. As such, the benefits of injury prevention programmes may be mediated by factors other than altered biomechanics and/or may happen through other biomechanical measures not included in this review.

Neurobiology of osteoarthritis: a systematic review and activation likelihood estimation meta-analysis.

Osteoarthritis (OA) affects 240 million people worldwide. Neuroimaging has been increasingly used to investigate brain changes in OA, however, there is considerable heterogeneity in reported results. The goal of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to synthesise existing literature and identify consistent brain alterations in OA. Six databases were searched from inception up to June, 2022. Full-texts of original human studies were included if they had: (i) neuroimaging data by site of OA (e.g. hand, knee, hip); (ii) data in healthy controls (HC); (iii) > 10 participants. Activation likelihood estimation (ALE) was conducted using GingerALE software on studies that reported peak activation coordinates and sample size. Our search strategy identified 6250 articles. Twenty-eight studies fulfilled the eligibility criteria, of which 18 were included in the meta-analysis. There were no significant differences in brain structure or function between OA and healthy control contrasts. In exploratory analysis, the right insula was associated with OA vs healthy controls, with less activity, connectivity and brain volume in OA. This region was implicated in both knee and hip OA, with an additional cluster in the medial prefrontal cortex observed only in the contrast between healthy controls and the hip OA subgroup, suggesting a possible distinction between the neural correlates of OA subtypes. Despite the limitations associated with heterogeneity and poor study quality, this synthesis identified neurobiological outcomes associated with OA, providing insight for future research. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021238735.

How Do Nonsurgical Interventions Improve Pain and Physical Function in People With Osteoarthritis? A Scoping Review of Mediation Analysis Studies.

OBJECTIVE: Nonsurgical interventions are recommended for osteoarthritis (OA). However, how interventions change pain and physical function is unclear. Therefore, the objectives of this scoping review were to 1) identify what potential mediators of nonsurgical interventions on pain and physical function have been evaluated and 2) summarize the findings according to intervention, joint, and outcome. METHODS: We searched Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Scopus databases. Studies were included if they conducted a mediation analysis on a randomized controlled trial evaluating a nonsurgical intervention on OA of any joint. Outcomes were pain and physical function. RESULTS: Nine knee OA studies, evaluating diet plus exercise, exercise, unloading shoes, high-expectation communication during acupuncture, and telephone-based weight loss plus exercise were identified. Except for weight loss and self-efficacy, putative mediators (knee muscle perfusion/extensor strength/adduction moment, systemic inflammatory biomarkers, physical activity, dietary intake, and pain beliefs) were evaluated by single studies. Ten mediators partially mediated intervention (diet plus exercise, exercise, high-expectation communication) effects on pain and physical function. Eight mediators were common to pain and function (reduced weight, increased knee extensor strength, and increased self-efficacy). Constant knee flexor muscle perfusion partially mediated exercise effects on pain, and knee pain relief partially mediated exercise effects on function. CONCLUSION: In knee OA, some evidence suggests that the benefits of 1) diet and exercise are mediated through changes in body weight, systemic inflammation, and self-efficacy; 2) exercise is mediated through changes in knee muscle strength and self-efficacy; and 3) high-expectation communication style is mediated through changes in self-efficacy.

What is real change in submaximal cardiorespiratory fitness in older adults? Retrospective analysis of a clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the test-retest reliability of submaximal cardiorespiratory fitness in healthy active older adults. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of 41 adults enrolled in a clinical trial [mean (sd) aged 59 yrs (7); 29% females; and body mass index 24.5 kg/m2 (3.3)]. Cardiorespiratory fitness was assessed using a cycle ergometer 6 weeks apart. The initial workload was 1 W per kilogram of free fat mass (W/kg FFM) and increased by 0.5 W/kg FFM every 3 min until participants could not maintain the speed at ≥ 60 rpm, they reached a rating of perceived exertion of 15-17, and/or obtained a respiratory exchange ratio (RER) of 1.000. Reliability of [Formula: see text], heart rate and RER was assessed for each workload, and for [Formula: see text], when RER reached 1.00. Reliability was examined as the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC(2,1)), Bland-Altman plots, standard error of measurement (SEM and SEM%), and the minimal detectable change (MDC). RESULTS: Test-retest agreement ranged between (ICC(2,1) 0.44-0.84) with no discernible systematic differences between assessments. The SEM% for absolute and relative [Formula: see text] ranged between 13.0 to 20.2%, and 13.8 to 26.3%, respectively. The MDC90% for absolute and relative [Formula: see text] ranged between 30.4% to 47.1%, and 32.2% to 61.4%, respectively. The lowest SEMs% and MDCs% for both absolute and relative [Formula: see text] were observed for workloads at 2.5 W kg/FFM (~ 13% and ~ 31%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Although at least modest relative reliability was consistently demonstrated, the smaller measurement error associated with absolute and relative [Formula: see text] at 2.5 W kg/FFM may indirectly suggest that submaximal cardiorespiratory fitness can be monitored more confidently at higher workloads. Findings provide critical information to determine how much change is considered 'real change' in repeated measures of cardiorespiratory fitness using a submaximal graded exercise testing protocol in healthy active older adults.

Physiotherapy Questionnaires App to Deliver Main Musculoskeletal Assessment Questionnaires: Development and Validation Study.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) translate subjective outcomes into objective data that can be quantified and analyzed. Nevertheless, the use of PROs in their traditional paper format is not practical for clinical practice due to limitations associated with the analysis and management of the data. To address the need for a viable way to group and utilize the main functioning assessment tools in the field of musculoskeletal disorders, the Physiotherapy Questionnaires app was developed. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to explain the development of the app, to validate it using two questionnaires, and to analyze whether participants prefer to use the app or the paper version of the questionnaires. METHODS: In the first stage, the app for an Android operational system was developed. In the second stage, the aim was to select questionnaires that were most often used in musculoskeletal clinical practice and research. The Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS) and American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) questionnaire were selected to validate the app. In total, 50 participants completed the paper and app versions of the AOFAS and 50 completed the FAOS. The study's outcomes were the correlation of the data between the paper and app versions as well as the preference of the participants between the two versions. RESULTS: The app was approved by experts after the adaptations of the layout for mobile phones and a total of 18 questionnaires were included in the app. Moreover, the app allows the generation of PDF and Excel files with the patients' data. In regards to validity, the mean of the total scores of the FAOS were 91.54% (SD 8.86%) for the paper version and 91.74% (SD 9.20%) for the app. There was no statistically significant differences in the means of the total scores or the subscales (P=.11-.94). The mean total scores for the AOFAS were 93.94 (SD 8.47) for the paper version and 93.96 (SD 8.48) for the app. No statistically significant differences were found for the total scores for the AOFAS or the subscales (P>.99). The app showed excellent agreement with the paper version of the FAOS, with an ICC value of 0.98 for the total score (95% CI 0.98-0.99), which was also found for the AOFAS with the ICC for the total score of 0.99 (95% CI 0.98-0.99). For compliance, 72% (36/50) of the participants in the FAOS group and 94% (47/50) in the AOFAS group preferred the app version. CONCLUSIONS: The Physiotherapy Questionnaires app showed validity and high levels of compliance for the FAOS and AOFAS, which indicates it is not inferior to the paper version of these two questionnaires and confirms its viability and feasibility for use in clinical practice.

The association of ankle dorsiflexion and dynamic knee valgus: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the association between ankle dorsiflexion (ADF) and dynamic knee valgus (DKV). METHODS: Electronic searches were conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and SPORTDiscus. A modified Downs and Black checklist was used for quality assessment and meta-analysis was performed to compare standardised mean differences (SMD) of ADF. RESULTS: Seventeen studies met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis showed that reduced ADF is associated with participants presenting with DKV compared to controls (SMD -0.65, 95% CI -0.88 to -0.41). Subgroup analysis showed consistent results regarding different forms of ADF measurement; restriction in ADF measured in weight-bearing position (SMD -1.25, 95% CI -2.24 to -0.25), non-weight-bearing with knee flexed (SMD -0.56, 95% CI -0.97 to -0.16) or non-weight-bearing with knee extended (SMD -0.54, 95% CI -0.80 to -0.28) was significantly associated with DKV. CONCLUSION: The meta-analysis results provide evidence that reduced ADF is correlated with DKV. The assessment of ADF in the clinical setting is important, as it may be related to harmful movement patterns of the lower limbs.

THERE ARE NO BIOMECHANICAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN RUNNERS CLASSIFIED BY THE FUNCTIONAL MOVEMENT SCREEN.

BACKGROUND: Running has been one of the main choices of physical activity in people seeking an active lifestyle. The Functional Movement Screen (FMS™) is a screening tool that aims to discern movement competency. PURPOSE: The purposes of this study were to compare biomechanical characteristics between two groups rated using the composite FMS™ score, and to analyze the influence of specific individual tests. The hypothesis was that the group that scored above 14 would demonstrate better performance on biomechanical tests than the group that scored below 14. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-Sectional Study. METHODS: Runners were screened using the FMS™ and were dichotomized into groups based on final score: Functional, where the subjects scored a 14 or greater (G≥14, n = 16) and dysfunctional, when the subjects scored less than 14 (G < 14, n = 16). All runners were evaluated using measures for flexibility, postural balance, muscle strength, knee dynamic valgus during forward step down test and time for the electromyographic response of the transversus abdominis and fibularis longus muscles. All data were analyzed with SPSS (p ≤ 0.05) and the index of asymmetry (IS) was calculated with the mean score of nondominant limb divided by the mean score of the dominant limb, multiplied by 100. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in flexibility, muscle strength, knee dynamic valgus, or myoelectric response time of the transversus abdominis and long fibular muscles. Index of asymmetry (IS) of global stability was 3.26 ± 26.79% in G≥14 and 31.72 ± 52.69% in G<14 (p = 0.02). In-line lunge and active straight-leg raise tests showed no significant difference between the groups (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, there were no biomechanical differences between the groups of runners as classified by the FMS™. In addition, in-line lunge and active strength-leg raise tests did not influence on the FMS™ final score. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2b.

BIOMECHANICAL DIFFERENCES IN BRAZILIAN JIU-JITSU ATHLETES: THE ROLE OF COMBAT STYLE.

BACKGROUND: Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu (BJJ) athletes can be divided into two combat styles: pass fighters (PFs) and guard fighters (GFs). Flexibility of the posterior chain muscles is highly necessary in these athletes, especially in GFs. On the other hand, isometric strength of the trunk extensors is required in PFs. Handgrip strength is important in holding the kimono of the opponent, and symmetrical lower-limb strength is important for the prevention of injuries due to the overload caused by training. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the biomechanical profiles of BJJ athletes with different combat styles using the following outcome measures: flexibility, trunk extensor isometric endurance, postural balance, handgrip isometric endurance and lower-limb muscle strength. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted using 19 GFs and 19 PFs. The sit-and-reach test was used to evaluate the flexibility of the posterior chain muscles. The Biodex Balance System® was used to evaluate balance. A handgrip dynamometer and a dorsal dynamometer were used to evaluate handgrip and trunk extensor endurance, respectively. Quadriceps and hamstring strength were evaluated with an isokinetic dynamometer at 60 °/s. RESULTS: No differences were observed between groups in terms of flexibility, balance, handgrip isometric endurance or quadriceps and hamstring strength; however, PFs (81.33) showed more isometric trunk extension endurance than GFs (68.85) (p = 0.02). Both groups had low values for hamstring/quadriceps ratio. CONCLUSION: No significant biomechanical differences were observed between PFs and GFs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2b.