Forward step down test - clinical rating is correlated with joint angles of the pelvis and hip: an observational study.

BACKGROUND: Clinical methods for assessing quality of movement and functional tests are important to clinicians. Typical deviations from normal kinematics during the clinical test of Forward Step Down Test (FSDT) are pelvic tilt and hip adduction which are associated with the risk of knee pain. OBJECTIVES: (1) to examine the correlation between clinical assessment of the FSDT and joint angle measurements of pelvis, hip, knee and ankle joints in males and females; (2) to examine the differences in joint angles between individuals rated as good, fair or poor in a FSDT performance test. METHODS: Ninety-two healthy individuals performing FSDT were video-taped with two-dimensional digital video cameras. The clinical assessment of the FSDT was rated by two experienced physical therapists as good, fair, or poor based on a Crossley et al. (2011) validated scale. Measurements of pelvic drop, hip adduction and knee valgus were taken using Image J software. RESULTS: Out of 177 lower limbs, 74 (37 in each limb) were clinically rated as "good/fair" (41.80%) while 103 (52 in the dominant leg and 51 in the non-dominant leg) were rated as "poor" (58.19%). No significant differences were observed between dominant and non-dominant legs or between males and females in clinical rating of the FSDT. Pelvic drop angle was significantly higher and hip adduction angle was significantly lower for "poor" clinical rating compared to "good/fair" in both dominant and non-dominant legs (p < 0.001) in males and females. Females demonstrated higher pelvic drop, lower hip adduction and higher knee valgus angles compared with males (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that the clinical rating of FSDT is correlated with joint angle measurements suggesting that this assessment can be utilized in clinical practice. Individuals with poor quality performance of FSDT showed higher pelvic drop and hip adduction movement. Further studies examining different populations with diverse disorders or pathologies are essential.

A Comparison between Different Types and Frequency of Physiotherapy Treatment for Children and Adolescents with Postural Problems and Low Back Pain.

AIM: To examine the effect of a once-a-week group physiotherapy session in addition to a once-a-month individual physiotherapy treatment, in comparison to a monthly individual physiotherapy treatment. METHODS: Fifty children and adolescents aged 10-18 years with poor back posture, some of whom had LBP, met individually with a physiotherapist once a month. The intervention group received an additional once-a-week group physiotherapy session for 12 weeks. Thorax curve angle, postural behavior, and low back pain (LBP) were measured before and after intervention. RESULTS: The thorax curve angle decreased from 39.2 ± 9.3 to 28.2 ± 6.8 (p < 0.001) in the group + individual therapy group and from 38.9 ± 9.3 to 27.9 ± 7.8 in the individual therapy only group (p < 0.001). LBP decreased from 5.6 ± 2.2 to 1.6 ± 1.9 (p < 0.001) and from 5.5 ± 2.1 to 2.8 ± 2.0 (p < 0.001). A significantly greater improvement in postural behavior was found in the group + individual therapy group (p = 0.04). Moreover, attrition rates were lower in the experimental group. CONCLUSION: A lower-frequency individual physiotherapy treatment for 12 weeks proved as beneficial as the same program with an additional higher-frequency group physiotherapy in improving thorax curve angle and LBP. However, the higher-frequency group physiotherapy in addition to the lower-frequency individual treatment was significantly more effective in improving postural behavior and adherence to treatment.

Agreement of an Evaluation of the Forward-Step-Down Test by a Broad Cohort of Clinicians With That of an Expert Panel.

CONTEXT: The forward-step-down (FSD) test may be used to identify underlying pathologies related to lower-extremity injuries. However, research on its interrater reliability is limited. OBJECTIVE: To assess the interrater reliability of the FSD test with a broad cohort of clinicians and to compare the level of agreement with an expert panel. DESIGN: Single-measure, interrater reliability. SETTING: Annual conference of the Israeli Physical Therapy Society. PARTICIPANTS: 15 healthy subjects who performed the FSD test and 142 physical therapists (PTs) who evaluated performance. METHODS: Each subject performed the FSD while being videoed. Six videos were selected by an expert panel for analysis. After viewing the videos, FSD performance was rated by 142 PTs, as well as by the expert panel, using a 3-level scale. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Interrater reliability determined by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and percentage of agreement with the expert panel. RESULTS: Fair to good reliability and acceptable agreement were found for the entire sample of raters (ICC -.61, agreement 74%). The percentage of agreement was greater in the subgroup of raters who were familiar with the FSD than in those who were not (78.08% vs 69.32%, respectively, P = .004). Years of work experience did not affect the percentage of agreement (P = .141). CONCLUSIONS: Fair to good interrater reliably of the FSD test was demonstrated by a broad cohort of PTs. The findings support the clinical utility of the FSD test as an assessment tool for quality of movement.