Hip abductor versus adductor strengthening for clinical outcomes in knee symptomatic osteoarthritis: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Hip adductors and abductors are weak in patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA). However, most studies have not investigated selective adductor strengthening. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of adding selective hip abductors versus adductors strengthening to lower limb multimodal exercise program for pain, self-reported function, knee-related quality of life, medication ingested and performance-based tests in patients with symptomatic KOA. DESING: Randomized controlled trial. METHODS: Sixty-six patients with KOA were randomly assigned to two treatment groups: hip abductor group (HABG) or hip adductor group (HADG). Both groups performed a lower limb multimodal exercise program. HABG and HADG groups added three hip abduction and three hip adduction exercises, respectively. Intensity of pain through numeric pain scale, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) subscales, Lequesne questionnaire, global perceived effect scale, medication ingested, performance-based tests were assessed at baseline, after 6 weeks, and 6 months. RESULTS: No significant between-group differences were found in primary outcomes: pain intensity (mean difference = -1.15, 95%CI -2.44 - 0.12, P = 0.07), KOOS-pain (mean difference = 1.64, 95%CI -6.79 - 10.07, P = 0.70) and KOOS-function in daily living (mean difference = -0.12, 95%CI, -8.78 - 8.54, P = 0.97) in 6 weeks. Groups did not differ in any secondary outcome after 6 weeks or after 6 months (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: There is no difference between adding hip abductors or adductors strengthening to lower limb multimodal exercise program in improving pain, self-reported function, quality of life, medication ingested and performance-based tests in patients with KOA.

Clinimetric properties of the knee extension prone test (KEPT): A new method to assess knee hyperextension deficit.

INTRODUCTION: The knee extension prone test (KEPT) can be a low-cost and affordable alternative for this assess knee hyperextension deficit. OBJECTIVE: To analyze concurrent validity and reliability of a new method for assessing knee extension prone (knee extension prone test; KEPT). METHODS: Participants were divided into two groups: Group 1 comprised healthy participants (HG) and Group 2 comprised participants with a history of knee injury (IG). Two examiners performed the following evaluations: (1) lateral knee goniometry, (2) anterior tibial inclinometry, (3) lateral photogrammetry in supine, (4) lateral photogrammetry in prone, and (5) KEPT. Concurrent validity was analyzed by Pearson's linear correlation coefficient (r), and intra- and inter-examiner reliability were analyzed by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). RESULTS: KEPT demonstrated good intra-examiner (ICC = 0.85, 95% CI = 0.75-0.89) and excellent inter-examiner (ICC = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.88-0.94) reliability. The standard error of measurement was 0.47° and 1.30° and the minimum detectable change was 2.35° and 6.5° for intra- and inter-examiner agreement, respectively. Concurrent validity of KEPT ranged from moderate to good (r = 0.54-0.78, p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: KEPT is a valid and reliable method for assessing knee hyperextension deficit in both healthy individuals and patients with knee injuries.

Dynamic postural stability and muscle strength in patellofemoral pain: Is there a correlation?

BACKGROUND: Although females with patellofemoral pain (PFP) show a decrease in hip and knee muscle strength, there is a lack of studies that associates this with postural stability. The purpose of this study was to assess the dynamic postural stability and muscle strength in the hips and knees of females with and without PFP, and to verify the association between the postural stability and the muscle strength in the PFP group. METHODS: Two groups were tested: one with 25 PFP and one with 25 asymptomatic. Postural stability was evaluated during stepping up down tasks using a force platform to determine the center of pressure (COP) excursion and velocity. A handheld dynamometer was used to assess the muscles strength. The correlation analysis was conducted between the COP variables and the muscle strength. RESULTS: The PFP group demonstrated greater total and medial-lateral COP displacement (8887.7±761.7 vs. 8129.4±691.9mm, P<0.001; 32.3±5.5 vs. 21.7±2.7mm, P<0.001) and a higher total of medial-lateral COP velocity (22.2±5.2 vs. 17.0±1.6 P=0.001). The PFP group showed weaknesses in all muscles (P<0.05), and there was a good positive correlation between the anterior-posterior displacement and the velocity of the extensor hip muscle (r=0.52, P<0.01; r=0.55, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Subjects with PFP have frontal dynamic postural stability deficit and show an association between hip extensor and sagittal plane stability.

Efficacy of acupuncture and electroacupuncture in patients with nonspecific low back pain: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that acupuncture and electroacupuncture (EA) are effective in the treatment of patients with low back pain. However, there is little evidence to support the use of one intervention over the other. The aim of this study is to compare the effect of acupuncture and electroacupuncture in the treatment of pain and disability in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain. METHODS/DESIGN: The study design is a randomized controlled trial. Patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain of more than three months duration are recruited at Rehabilitation Center of Taboao da Serra - SP (Brazil). After examination, sixty-six patients will be randomized into one of two groups: acupuncture group (AG) (n = 33) and electroacupuncture group (EG) (n = 33). Interventions will last one hour, and will happen twice a week for 6 weeks. The primary clinical outcomes will be pain intensity as measured and functional disability. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: quality of pain, quality of life. perception of the overall effect, depressive state, flexibility and kinesiophobia. All the outcomes will be assessed will be assessed at baseline, at treatment end, and three months after treatment end. Significance level will be determined at the 5 % level. Results of this trial will help clarify the value of acupuncture and electroacupuncture as a treatment for chronic low back pain and if they are different. DISCUSSION: Results of this trial will help clarify the value of acupuncture needling and electroacupuncture stimulation of specific points on the body as a treatment for chronic low back pain. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02039037 . Register October 30, 2013.