Anterior cruciate ligament rupture is associated with abnormal and asymmetrical lower limb loading during walking

Walking and running roll-off characteristics in patients with ACL reconstruction history

BACKGROUND

Gait mechanics alternation is one of side effects after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Foot roll-off characteristics shows whole gait mechanics and is not well known in ACLR patients. The purpose of present study was to investigate the roll-off process characteristics while walking and running in patients with ACLR history.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Is there any difference in walking and running roll-off characteristics between patients with ACLR history and healthy individuals?

METHODS

48 physically active males (24 healthy and 24 with ACLR history) participated in this study. Participants walked and ran on a footscan (Rsscan International) which was mounted in the midway of a 18 m runway at the speeds of 2 m·s-1 and 3.3 m·s-1. Center of pressure (COP) trajectory, timing of stance subphases, foot progression angle and contact time were calculated bilaterally in walking and running. Mixed-design MANOVA was used to examine effect of ACLR on the outcomes.

RESULTS

The results showed that ACLR participants had greater foot progression angle (p = .001) and more medially oriented COP trajectory in forefoot push-off phase (FFPOP) of waking (p = .001) and running (p = .001), but showed shorter contact time in running compared to healthy group (p = .02). Involved leg in ACLR group showed greater foot progression angle (p = .001) and more medially directed COP trajectory in FFPOP of walking (p = .001) and running (p = .01) compared to uninvolved side. Also, involved leg had shorter contact time (p = .04) and shorter relative time in the forefoot contact phase (p = .001), and longer relative time in forefoot flat phase (p = .001) during running.

SIGNIFICANCE

Based on the results, it can be concluded that ACLR affects running and walking roll-off characteristics which can show altered mechanics. Running shows remarkable differences in roll-off process than walking. So, it is recommended to use running in post-ACLR assessments rather than walking.

Footwork Pro System Reproducibility of Static and Dynamic Plantar Pressure Indicators

Objective

The purpose of this study was to identify the reproducibility of the Footwork Pro plate in the measurement of static and dynamic plantar pressure in healthy adults.

Methods

We performed a reliability study using a test-retest design. The sample consisted of 49 healthy adults of both sexes, aged 18 to 64. Participants were assessed on the following 2 different occasions: the initial moment and 7 days later. Measurements for the static and dynamic plantar pressure were performed. We used the Student t test for paired data, the concordance correlation coefficient, and bias to estimate reliability.

Results

Plantar pressure values for the static condition (peak plantar pressure, plantar surface contact area, and body mass distribution) and dynamic condition (peak plantar pressure, plantar surface contact area, and contact time) between the first and second measurements did not present statistically significant differences. The concordance correlation coefficients were ≤0.90, and the biases were of low magnitude.

Conclusion

The findings showed that the Footwork Pro system offered clinically acceptable reproducibility to identify static and dynamic plantar pressure and thus may be a reliable tool for this purpose.

ACLD patients exhibit additional knee kinematic asymmetries at the speed level of healthy subjects

Anterior cruciate ligament deficiency (ACLD) patients tend to walk slowly but try to catch up with the speed level of healthy subjects daily. Exploring the effects of the walking speed level of healthy subjects on the ACLD patients’ knee kinematics is important to improving non-operative treatments and delaying the progression of posttraumatic knee osteoarthritis. This study aimed to explore whether healthy controls’ walking speed level leads to additional knee kinematic asymmetries in patients with ACLD. 27 ACLD patients and 29 healthy controls were recruited for the study. The ACLD patients walked at two levels of walking speed, including self-selected and healthy controls’ walking speed levels. A three-dimensional gait analysis system was used to collect their knee kinematic data. ACLD patients exhibited more kinematic asymmetries when walking at healthy controls’ walking speed level than at their self-selected speeds. The kinematic asymmetries included increased posterior tibial translation (4.6 mm) and anteroposterior tibial ROM (3.9 mm), abduction angle (1.5°), and distal tibial translation (3.2 mm) asymmetries (p < 0.05). Our findings are meaningful for developing non-operative treatment strategies for patients with ACLD. To get fewer knee kinematic asymmetries, self-selected walking speed could be suggested for patients with ACLD daily rather than the speed levels of healthy subjects.

Comparison of Foot Kinematics and Foot Plantar Area and Pressure Among Five Different Closed Kinematic Tasks

BACKGROUND

Different closed kinematic tasks may present different magnitudes of knee abduction, foot pronation, and foot plantar pressure and area. Although there are plenty of studies comparing knee abduction between different tasks, the literature lacks information regarding differences in foot pronation and foot plantar pressure and area. We compared foot angular displacement in the frontal plane and foot plantar pressure and area among five closed kinematic tasks.

METHODS

Forefoot and rearfoot angular displacement and foot plantar pressure and area were collected in 30 participants while they performed the following tasks: stair descent, single-leg step down, single-leg squat, single-leg landing, and drop vertical jump. Repeated-measures analyses of variance were used to investigate differences between tasks with α = 0.05.

RESULTS

Single-leg squat and stair descent had increased foot total plantar area compared with single-leg landing (P = .005 versus .027; effect size [ES] = 0.66), drop vertical jump (P = .001 versus P = .001; ES = 0.38), and single-leg step down (P = .01 versus P = .007; ES = 0.43). Single-leg landing and single-leg step down had greater foot total plantar area compared with drop vertical jump (P = .026 versus P = .014; ES = 0.54). There were differences also in rearfoot and midfoot plantar area and pressure and forefoot plantar pressure.

CONCLUSIONS

Differences in foot-striking pattern, magnitude of ground reaction force, and task speed might explain these findings. Clinicians should consider these findings to improve decisions about tasks used during rehabilitation of patients with foot conditions.