Search

ObjectiveThis scoping review examines how different levels and types of partial foot amputation affect gait and explores how these findings may affect the minimal impairment criteria for wheelchair tennis.MethodsFour databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL and SPORTDiscus) were systematically searched in February 2021 for terms related to partial foot amputation and ambulation. The search was updated in February 2022. All study designs investigating gait-related outcomes in individuals with partial foot amputation were included and independently screened by two reviewers based on Arksey and O’Malley’s methodological framework and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews.ResultsTwenty-nine publications with data from 252 participants with partial foot amputation in 25 studies were analysed. Toe amputations were associated with minor gait abnormalities, and great toe amputations caused loss of push-off in a forward and lateral direction. Metatarsophalangeal amputations were associated with loss of stability and decreased gait speed. Ray amputations were associated with decreased gait speed and reduced lower extremity range of motion. Transmetatarsal amputations and more proximal amputations were associated with abnormal gait, substantial loss of power generation across the ankle and impaired mobility.ConclusionsPartial foot amputation was associated with various gait changes, depending on the type of amputation. Different levels and types of foot amputation are likely to affect tennis performance. We recommend including first ray, transmetatarsal, Chopart and Lisfranc amputations in the minimum impairment criteria, excluding toe amputations (digits two to five), and we are unsure whether to include or exclude great toe, ray (two to five) and metatarsophalangeal amputations.Trial registrationThe protocol of this scoping review was previously registered at the Open Science Framework Registry (https://osf.io/8gh9y) and published.

Objective To investigate the test-retest reliability and validity of the Kerlan-Jobe Orthopaedic Clinic shoulder and elbow score (KJOC) in elite Canoe Slalom athletes and determine its ability to predict future shoulder pain. Design Observational study with embedded test-retest reliability study. Setting British Canoe Slalom National Training Centre. Participants Nineteen athletes from the British Canoe Slalom team for the 2019 season. Main outcome measures The KJOC was completed at the start of winter training and start of the 2019 competitive season. Current, historical (6-months pre-questionnaire) and prospective (4-months post-questionnaire) shoulder injuries were recorded. Results Test-retest reliability was found to be excellent (ICC3,1 = 0.97), with a minimal detectable change (MDC95%) of 6.7. Compared to uninjured athletes, currently injured and historically injured athletes scored significantly lower (p = 0.002 and p = 0.011, respectively), with the difference between means > MDC95%. A cut-off of 88 was found to be predictive of shoulder pain (AUC: 0.779; sensitivity: 0.60; specificity: 0.95; positive likelihood ratio: 11.4). Conclusion The KJOC demonstrated excellent reliability and can distinguish between athletes with and without current or historical shoulder pain. A KJOC score of

Objective To investigate the correlation of arm length with different CKCUEST measures and determine if a modification of the test position (modified-CKCUEST), or normalisation of the CKCUEST (normalised-CKCUEST) score after testing, control for arm length most effectively. Study design Quasi Experimental. Setting British Canoe Slalom National Training Centre. Participants Thirteen (5 male, 8 female) asymptomatic national squad canoe/kayak slalom athletes were recruited during winter profiling. Main outcome measure Three measures of the CKCUEST were investigated. The CKCUEST, hands 36 inches apart; modified-CKCUEST, hands arm width apart (measured as C7 spinous process to tip of middle finger); and normalised-CKCUEST (measured as CKCUEST score/arm length). Results A significant positive correlation was found between arm length and the CKCUEST score (r = 0.807; p = 0.001) and normalised-CKCUEST score (r = 0.654; p = 0.015). No significant correlation was found between the modified-CKCUEST score and arm length (p = 0.745). A statistically significant difference between narrow and wide hand positions, greater than the minimal detectable change, was found (p = 0.000). Conclusions Arm length has a significant impact on CKCUEST score. The modified-CKCUEST score corrected for arm length where the normalised-CKCUEST score did not. Modifying the CKCUEST to individual anthropometrics needs to be performed pre-testing when comparisons are being made between individuals or groups.