Short-term effects of a trunk modification program on patellofemoral joint stress in asymptomatic runners

Sensor-based augmented visual feedback for coordination training in healthy adults: a scoping review

Introduction

Recent advances in sensor technology demonstrate the potential to enhance training regimes with sensor-based augmented visual feedback training systems for complex movement tasks in sports. Sensorimotor learning requires feedback that guides the learning process towards an optimal solution for the task to be learned, while considering relevant aspects of the individual control system-a process that can be summarized as learning or improving coordination. Sensorimotor learning can be fostered significantly by coaches or therapists providing additional external feedback, which can be incorporated very effectively into the sensorimotor learning process when chosen carefully and administered well. Sensor technology can complement existing measures and therefore improve the feedback provided by the coach or therapist. Ultimately, this sensor technology constitutes a means for autonomous training by giving augmented feedback based on physiological, kinetic, or kinematic data, both in real-time and after training. This requires that the key aspects of feedback administration that prevent excessive guidance can also be successfully automated and incorporated into such electronic devices.

Methods

After setting the stage from a computational perspective on motor control and learning, we provided a scoping review of the findings on sensor-based augmented visual feedback in complex sensorimotor tasks occurring in sports-related settings. To increase homogeneity and comparability of the results, we excluded studies focusing on modalities other than visual feedback and employed strict inclusion criteria regarding movement task complexity and health status of participants.

Results

We reviewed 26 studies that investigated visual feedback in training regimes involving healthy adults aged 18-65. We extracted relevant data regarding the chosen feedback and intervention designs, measured outcomes, and summarized recommendations from the literature.

Discussion

Based on these findings and the theoretical background on motor learning, we compiled a set of considerations and recommendations for the development and evaluation of future sensor-based augmented feedback systems in the interim. However, high heterogeneity and high risk of bias prevent a meaningful statistical synthesis for an evidence-based feedback design guidance. Stronger study design and reporting guidelines are necessary for future research in the context of complex skill acquisition.

The Effects of Increasing Trunk Flexion During Stair Ascent on the Rate and Magnitude of Achilles Tendon Force in Asymptomatic Females

Research indicates that increasing trunk flexion may optimize patellofemoral joint loading. However, this postural change could cause an excessive Achilles tendon force (ATF) and injury risk during movement. This study aimed to examine the effects of increasing trunk flexion during stair ascent on ATF, ankle biomechanics, and vertical ground reaction force in females. Twenty asymptomatic females (age: 23.4 [2.5] y; height: 1.6 [0.8] m; mass: 63.0 [12.2] kg) ascended stairs using their self-selected and flexed trunk postures. Compared with the self-selected trunk condition, decreases were observed for peak ATF (mean differences [MD] = 0.14 N/kg; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.06 to 0.23; Cohen d = -1.2; P = .003), average rate of ATF development (MD = 0.25 N/kg/s; 95% CI, 0.07 to 0.43; Cohen d = -0.9; P = .010), ankle plantar flexion moment (MD = 0.08 N·m/kg; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.13; Cohen d = -1.1; P = .005), and vertical ground reaction force (MD = 38.6 N/kg; 95% CI, 20.3 to 56.90; Cohen d = -1.8; P < .001). Increasing trunk flexion did not increase ATF. Instead, this postural change was associated with a decreased ATF rate and magnitude and may benefit individuals with painful Achilles tendinopathy.

Trunk Biomechanics in Individuals with Knee Disorders: A Systematic Review with Evidence Gap Map and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The trunk is the foundation for transfer and dissipation of forces throughout the lower extremity kinetic chain. Individuals with knee disorders may employ trunk biomechanical adaptations to accommodate forces at the knee or compensate for muscle weakness. This systematic review aimed to synthesize the literature comparing trunk biomechanics between individuals with knee disorders and injury-free controls.

METHODS

Five databases were searched from inception to January 2022. Observational studies comparing trunk kinematics or kinetics during weight-bearing tasks (e.g., stair negotiation, walking, running, landings) between individuals with knee disorders and controls were included. Meta-analyses for each knee disorder were performed. Outcome-level certainty was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE), and evidence gap maps were created.

RESULTS

A total of 81 studies investigating trunk biomechanics across six different knee disorders were included (i.e., knee osteoarthritis [OA], total knee arthroplasty [TKA], patellofemoral pain [PFP], patellar tendinopathy [PT], anterior cruciate ligament deficiency [ACLD], and anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction [ACLR]). Individuals with knee OA presented greater trunk flexion during squatting (SMD 0.88, 95% CI 0.58-1.18) and stepping tasks (SMD 0.56, 95% CI 0.13-.99); ipsilateral and contralateral trunk lean during walking (SMD 1.36; 95% CI 0.60-2.11) and sit-to-stand (SMD 1.49; 95% CI 0.90-2.08), respectively. Greater trunk flexion during landing tasks in individuals with PFP (SMD 0.56; 95% CI 0.01-1.12) or ACLR (SMD 0.48; 95% CI 0.21-.75) and greater ipsilateral trunk lean during single-leg squat in individuals with PFP (SMD 1.01; 95% CI 0.33-1.70) were also identified. No alterations in trunk kinematics of individuals with TKA were identified. Evidence gap maps outlined the lack of investigations for individuals with PT or ACLD, as well as for trunk kinetics across knee disorders.

CONCLUSION

Individuals with knee OA, PFP, or ACLR present with altered trunk kinematics in the sagittal and frontal planes. The findings of this review support the assessment of trunk biomechanics in these individuals in order to identify possible targets for rehabilitation and avoidance strategies.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration number: CRD42019129257.

Leaning the Trunk Forward Decreases Patellofemoral Joint Loading During Uneven Running

ABSTRACT

AminiAghdam, S, Epro, G, James, D, and Karamanidis, K. Leaning the trunk forward decreases patellofemoral joint loading during uneven running. J Strength Cond Res 36(12): 3345-3351, 2022-Although decline surfaces or a more upright trunk posture during running increase the patellofemoral joint (PFJ) contact force and stress, less is known about these kinetic parameters under simultaneous changes to the running posture and surface height. This study aimed to investigate the interaction between Step (10-cm drop-step and level step) and Posture (trunk angle from the vertical: self-selected, ∼15°; backward, ∼0°; forward, ∼25°) on PFJ kinetics (primary outcomes) and knee kinematics and kinetics as well as hip and ankle kinetics (secondary outcomes) in 12 runners at 3.5 ms -1 . Two-way repeated measures analyses of variance ( α = 0.05) revealed no step-related changes in peak PFJ kinetics across running postures; however, a decreased peak knee flexion angle and increased joint stiffness in the drop-step only during backward trunk-leaning. The Step main effect revealed significantly increased peak hip and ankle extension moments in the drop-step, signifying pronounced mechanical demands on these joints. The Posture main effect revealed significantly higher and lower PFJ kinetics during backward and forward trunk-leaning, respectively, when compared with the self-selected condition. Forward trunk-leaning yielded significantly lower peak knee extension moments and higher hip extension moments, whereas the opposite effects occurred with backward trunk-leaning. Overall, changes to the running posture, but not to the running surface height, influenced the PFJ kinetics. In line with the previously reported efficacy of forward trunk-leaning in mitigating PFJ stress while even or decline running, this technique, through a distal-to-proximal joint load redistribution, also seems effective during running on surfaces with height perturbations.

The effects of increased forward trunk lean during stair ascent on hip adduction and internal rotation in asymptomatic females

BACKGROUND

Increased hip adduction and internal rotation can lead to excessive patellofemoral joint stress and contribute to patellofemoral pain development. The gluteus maximus acts as a hip extensor, abductor, and external rotator. Improving hip extensor use by increasing one's forward trunk lean in the sagittal plane may improve frontal and transverse plane hip kinematics during stair ascent.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Does increasing forward trunk lean during stair ascent affect peak hip adduction and internal rotation?

METHODS

Twenty asymptomatic females performed five stair ascent trials (96 steps/min) on an instrumented stair using their self-selected and forward trunk lean postures. Three-dimensional kinematics (200 Hz) and kinetics (2000 Hz) were recorded during the stance phase of stair ascent. Biomechanical dependent variables were calculated during the stance phase of stair ascent and included peak forward trunk lean, hip flexion, hip adduction, hip internal rotation angles, and the average hip extensor moment.

RESULTS

During the forward trunk lean condition, decreases were observed for peak hip adduction (MD = 2.8˚; 95% CI = 1.9, 3.8; p < 0.001) and peak hip internal rotation (MD = 1.1˚; 95% CI = 0.1, 2.2; p = 0.04). In contrast, increases were observed during the forward trunk lean condition for the peak forward trunk lean angle (MD = -34.7˚; 95% CI = -39.1, -30.3; p < 0.001), average hip extensor moment (MD = -0.5 N·m/kg; 95% CI = -0.5, -0.4; p < 0.001), and stance time duration (MD = -0.02 s; 95% CI = -0.04, 0.00; p = 0.017).

SIGNIFICANCE

Increasing forward trunk lean and hip extensor use during stair ascent decreased peak hip adduction and internal rotation in asymptomatic females. Future studies should examine the effects of increasing forward trunk lean on hip kinematics, self-reported pain, and function in individuals with patellofemoral pain.

May the force be with you: understanding how patellofemoral joint reaction force compares across different activities and physical interventions-a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review and synthesise patellofemoral joint reaction force (PFJRF) in healthy individuals and those with patellofemoral pain and osteoarthritis (OA), during everyday activities, therapeutic exercises and with physical interventions (eg, foot orthotics, footwear, taping, bracing).

DESIGN

A systematic review with meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, SportDiscus and Cochrane Library databases were searched.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Observational and interventional studies reporting PFJRF during everyday activities, therapeutic exercises, and physical interventions.

RESULTS

In healthy individuals, the weighted average of mean (±SD) peak PFJRF for everyday activities were: walking 0.9±0.4 body weight (BW), stair ascent 3.2±0.7 BW, stair descent 2.8±0.5 BW and running 5.2±1.2 BW. In those with patellofemoral pain, peak PFJRF were: walking 0.8±0.2 BW, stair ascent 2.5±0.5 BW, stair descent 2.6±0.5 BW, running 4.1±0.9 BW. Only single studies reported peak PFJRF during everyday activities in individuals with patellofemoral OA/articular cartilage defects (walking 1.3±0.5 BW, stair ascent 1.6±0.4 BW, stair descent 1.0±0.5 BW). The PFJRF was reported for many different exercises and physical interventions; however, considerable variability precluded any pooled estimates.

SUMMARY

Everyday activities and exercises involving larger knee flexion (eg, squatting) expose the patellofemoral joint to higher PFJRF than those involving smaller knee flexion (eg, walking). There were no discernable differences in peak PFJRF during everyday activities between healthy individuals and those with patellofemoral pain/OA. The information on PFJRF may be used to select appropriate variations of exercises and physical interventions.

Comparisons of trunk and knee mechanics during various speeds of treadmill running between runners with and without patellofemoral pain: a preliminary study

[Purpose] To determine if runners with patellofemoral pain (PFP) exhibit higher patellofemoral joint (PFJ) stress and trunk extension compared to pain-free runners during treadmill running. [Participants and Methods] Twelve runners (7 with PFP and 5 pain-free) participated in this study. Participants ran at 3 different running conditions: self-selected, fast (120% of self-selected), and slow (80% of self-selected) speeds. Kinematics and kinetics of trunk and lower extremities were obtained. PFJ stress, PFJ reaction force, and PFJ contact area were determined using a biomechanical model. Two-factor ANOVAs with repeated measures were used to compare outcome variables between 3 speeds and between 2 groups. [Results] There was no significant difference in peak PFJ stress between groups across the 3 speeds. Peak PFJ stress was lowest during slow running compared to fast and self-selected running speed conditions across both groups. No significant difference was found in trunk flexion angle, PFJ reaction force, or PFJ contact area between groups across the 3 speeds. [Conclusion] Runners with and without PFP exhibited similar peak PFJ stress and trunk flexion angle during treadmill running. This preliminary work does not support the theory that reduced trunk flexion during running contributes to increased PFJ stress in runners with PFP.

Uneven running: How does trunk-leaning affect the lower-limb joint mechanics and energetics?

This study aimed to investigate the role of trunk posture in running locomotion. Twelve recreational runners ran in the laboratory across even and uneven ground surface (expected 10 cm drop-step) with three trunk-lean angles from the vertical (self-selected, ∼15°; anterior, ∼25°; posterior, ∼0°) while 3D kinematic and kinetic data were collected using a 3D motion-capture-system and two embedded force-plates. Two-way repeated measures ANOVAs (α = 0.05) compared lower-limb joint mechanics (angles, moments, energy absorption and generation) and ground-reaction-force parameters (braking and propulsive impulse) between Step (level and drop) and Posture conditions. The Step-by-Posture interaction revealed decreased hip energy generation, and greater peak knee extension moment in the drop-step during running with posterior versus anterior trunk-lean. Furthermore, energy absorption across hip and ankle nearly doubled in the drop-step across all running conditions. The Step main effect revealed that the knee and ankle energy absorption, ankle energy generation, ground-reaction-force, and braking impulse significantly increased in the drop-step. The Posture main effect revealed that, compared with a self-selected trunk-lean, the knee's energy absorption/generation, ankle's energy generation and the braking impulse were either retained or attenuated when leaning the trunk anteriorly. The opposite effects occurred with a posterior trunk-lean. In conclusion, while the pronounced mechanical ankle stress in drop-steps is marginally affected by posture, changing the trunk-lean reorganizes the load distribution across the knee and hip joints. Leaning the trunk anteriorly in running shifts loading from the knee to the hip not only in level running but also when coping with ground-level changes.Highlights Changing the trunk-lean when running reorganizes the load distribution across the knee and hip joints.Leaning the trunk anteriorly from a habitual trunk posture during running attenuates the mechanical stress on the knee, while the opposite effect occurs with a posterior trunk-lean, irrespective to the ground surface uniformity.The effect of posture on pronounced mechanical ankle stress in small perturbation height during running is marginal.Leaning the trunk anteriorly shifts loading from the knee to the hip not only in level running but also when coping with small perturbation height.