Search

Patellofemoral joint (PFJ) osteoarthritis is common following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) and may be linked with altered joint loading. However, little is known about the cross-sectional and longitudinal relationship between PFJ loading and osteoarthritis post-ACLR. This study tested if altered PFJ loading is associated with prevalent and worsening early PFJ osteoarthritis post-ACLR. Forty-six participants (mean ± 1 SD age 26 ± 5 years) approximately 1-year post-ACLR underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and biomechanical assessment of their reconstructed knee. Trunk and lower-limb kinematics plus ground reaction forces were recorded during the landing phase of a standardized forward hop. These data were input into a musculoskeletal model to calculate the PFJ contact force. Follow-up MRI was completed on 32 participants at 5-years post-ACLR. Generalized linear models (Poisson regression) assessed the relationship between PFJ loading and prevalent early PFJ osteoarthritis (i.e., presence of a PFJ cartilage lesion at 1-year post-ACLR) and worsening PFJ osteoarthritis (i.e., incident/progressive PFJ cartilage lesion between 1- and 5-years post-ACLR). A lower peak PFJ contact force was associated with prevalent early PFJ osteoarthritis at 1-year post-ACLR (n = 14 [30.4%]; prevalence ratio: 1.37; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02-1.85) and a higher risk of worsening PFJ osteoarthritis between 1- and 5-years post-ACLR (n = 9 [28.1%]; risk ratio: 1.55, 95% CI: 1.13-2.11). Young adults post-ACLR who exhibited lower PFJ loading during hopping were more likely to have early PFJ osteoarthritis at 1-year and worsening PFJ osteoarthritis between 1- and 5-years. Clinical interventions aimed at mitigating osteoarthritis progression may be beneficial for those with signs of lower PFJ loading post-ACLR.

Altered biomechanics are frequently observed following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Yet, little is known about knee-joint loading, particularly in the patellofemoral-joint, despite patellofemoral-joint osteoarthritis commonly occurring post-ACLR. This study compared knee-joint reaction forces and impulses during the landing phase of a single-leg forward hop in the reconstructed knee of people 12-24 months post-ACLR and uninjured controls. Experimental marker data and ground forces for 66 participants with ACLR (28 ± 6 years, 78 ± 15 kg) and 33 uninjured controls (26 ± 5 years, 70 ± 12 kg) were input into scaled-generic musculoskeletal models to calculate joint angles, joint moments, muscle forces, and the knee-joint reaction forces and impulses. The ACLR group exhibited a lower peak knee flexion angle (mean difference: -6°; 95% confidence interval: [-10°, -2°]), internal knee extension moment (-3.63 [-5.29, -1.97] percentage of body weight × participant height (body weight [BW] × HT), external knee adduction moment (-1.36 [-2.16, -0.56]% BW × HT) and quadriceps force (-2.02 [-2.95, -1.09] BW). The ACLR group also exhibited a lower peak patellofemoral-joint compressive force (-2.24 [-3.31, -1.18] BW), net tibiofemoral-joint compressive force (-0.74 [-1.20, 0.28] BW), and medial compartment force (-0.76 [-1.08, -0.44] BW). Finally, only the impulse of the patellofemoral-joint compressive force was lower in the ACLR group (-0.13 [-0.23, -0.03] body weight-seconds). Lower compressive forces are evident in the patellofemoral- and tibiofemoral-joints of ACLR knees compared to uninjured controls during a single-leg forward hop-landing task. Our findings may have implications for understanding the contributing factors for incidence and progression of knee osteoarthritis after ACLR surgery.

BACKGROUND: Despite calf muscle strain injuries (CMSI) being problematic in many sports, there is a dearth of research to guide clinicians dealing with these injuries. The aim of this study was to evaluate the current practices and perspectives of a select group of international experts regarding the assessment, management and prevention of CMSI using in-depth semi-structured interviews. RESULTS: Twenty expert clinicians working in elite sport and/or clinician-researchers specialising in the field completed interviews. A number of key points emerged from the interviews. Characteristics of CMSI were considered unique compared to other muscle strains. Rigor in the clinical approach clarifies the diagnosis, whereas ongoing monitoring of calf capacity and responses to loading exposure provides the most accurate estimate of prognosis. Athlete intrinsic characteristics, injury factors and sport demands shaped rehabilitation across six management phases, which were guided by key principles to optimise performance at return to play (RTP) while avoiding subsequent injury or recurrence. To prevent CMSI, periodic monitoring is common, but practices vary and data are collected to inform load-management and exercise selection rather than predict future CMSI. A universal injury prevention program for CMSI may not exist. Instead, individualised strategies should reflect athlete intrinsic characteristics and sport demands. CONCLUSIONS: Information provided by experts enabled a recommended approach to clinically evaluate CMSI to be outlined, highlighting the injury characteristics considered most important for diagnosis and prognosis. Principles for optimal management after CMSI were also identified, which involved a systematic approach to rehabilitation and the RTP decision. Although CMSI were reportedly difficult to prevent, on- and off-field strategies were implemented by experts to mitigate risk, particularly in susceptible athletes.

Landing manoeuvres are an integral task for humans, especially in the context of sporting activities. Such tasks often involve landing on one leg which requires the coordination of multiple muscles in order to effectively dissipate kinetic energy. However, no prior studies have provided a detailed description of the strategy used by the major lower limb muscles to perform single-leg landing. The purpose of the present study was to understand how humans coordinate their lower limb muscles during a single-leg landing task. Marker trajectories, ground reaction forces (GRFs), and surface electromyography (EMG) data were collected from healthy male participants performing a single-leg landing from a height of 0.31 m. An EMG-informed neuromusculoskeletal modelling approach was used to generate neuromechanical simulations of the single-leg landing task. The muscular strategy was determined by computing the magnitude and temporal characteristics of musculotendon forces and energetics. Muscle function was determined by computing muscle contributions to lower limb net joint moments, GRFs and lower limb joint contact forces. It was found that the vasti, soleus, gluteus maximus and gluteus medius produced the greatest muscle forces and negative (eccentric) mechanical work. Downward momentum of the centre-of-mass was resisted primarily by the soleus, vasti, gastrocnemius, rectus femoris, and gluteus maximus, whilst forward momentum was primarily resisted by the quadriceps (vasti and rectus femoris). Flexion of the lower limb joints was primarily resisted by the uni-articular gluteus maximus (hip), vasti (knee) and soleus (ankle). Overall, our findings provide a unique insight into the muscular strategy used by humans during a landing manoeuvre and have implications for the design of athletic training programs.

Hamstring strain injury (HSI) is a common and costly injury in many sports such as the various professional football codes. Most HSIs have been reported to occur during high intensity sprinting actions. This observation has led to the suggestion that a link between sprinting biomechanics and HSIs may exist. The aim of this literature review was to evaluate the available scientific evidence underpinning the potential link between sprinting biomechanics and HSIs. A structured search of the literature was completed followed by a risk of bias assessment. A total of eighteen studies were retrieved. Sixteen studies involved retrospective and/or prospective analyses, of which only three were judged to have a low risk of bias. Two other case studies captured data before and after an acute HSI. A range of biomechanical variables have been measured, including ground reaction forces, trunk and lower-limb joint angles, hip and knee joint moments and powers, hamstring muscle-tendon unit stretch, and surface electromyographic activity from various trunk and thigh muscles. Overall, current evidence was unable to provide a clear and nonconflicting perspective on the potential link between sprinting biomechanics and HSIs. Nevertheless, some interesting findings were revealed, which hopefully will stimulate future research on this topic.

We sought to provide a more comprehensive understanding of how the individual leg muscles act synergistically to generate a ground force impulse and maximize the change in forward momentum of the body during accelerated sprinting. We combined musculoskeletal modelling with gait data to simulate the majority of the acceleration phase (19 foot contacts) of a maximal sprint over ground. Individual muscle contributions to the ground force impulse were found by evaluating each muscle's contribution to the vertical and fore-aft components of the ground force (termed "supporter" and "accelerator/brake," respectively). The ankle plantarflexors played a major role in achieving maximal-effort accelerated sprinting. Soleus acted primarily as a supporter by generating a large fraction of the upward impulse at each step whereas gastrocnemius contributed appreciably to the propulsive and upward impulses and functioned as both accelerator and supporter. The primary role of the vasti was to deliver an upward impulse to the body (supporter), but these muscles also acted as a brake by retarding forward momentum. The hamstrings and gluteus medius functioned primarily as accelerators. Gluteus maximus was neither an accelerator nor supporter as it functioned mainly to decelerate the swinging leg in preparation for foot contact at the next step. Fundamental knowledge of lower-limb muscle function during maximum acceleration sprinting is of interest to coaches endeavoring to optimize sprint performance in elite athletes as well as sports medicine clinicians aiming to improve injury prevention and rehabilitation practices.

INTRODUCTION: This double-blind, randomised controlled trial (RCT) aims to estimate the effect of a physiotherapist-led intervention with targeted strengthening compared with a physiotherapist-led intervention with standardised stretching, on hip-related quality of life (QOL) or perceived improvement at 6 months in people with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) syndrome. We hypothesise that at 6 months, targeted strengthening physiotherapist-led treatment will be associated with greater improvements in hip-related QOL or greater patient-perceived global improvement when compared with standardised stretching physiotherapist-led treatment. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will recruit 164 participants with FAI syndrome who will be randomised into one of the two intervention groups, both receiving one-on-one treatment with the physiotherapist over 6 months. The targeted strengthening physiotherapist-led treatment group will receive a personalised exercise therapy and education programme. The standardised stretching physiotherapist-led treatment group will receive standardised stretching and personalised education programme. Primary outcomes are change in hip-related QOL using International Hip Outcome Tool-33 and patient-perceived global improvement. Secondary outcomes include cost-effectiveness, muscle strength, range of motion, functional task performance, biomechanics, hip cartilage structure and physical activity levels. Statistical analyses will make comparisons between both treatment groups by intention to treat, with all randomised participants included in analyses, regardless of protocol adherence. Linear mixed models (with baseline value as a covariate and treatment condition as a fixed factor) will be used to evaluate the treatment effect and 95% CI at primary end-point (6 months). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol was approved (La Trobe University Human Ethics Committee (HEC17-080)) and prospectively registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Tri

BACKGROUND: Calf muscle strain injuries (CMSI) show consistent rates of prevalence and re-injury in elite Australian Football players. An epidemiological evaluation is warranted to better understand the clinical presentation and recovery of CMSI. PURPOSE: First, to describe the epidemiology of CMSI in elite Australian Football players. Second, to determine if recovery following injury is different according to: (a) injury type (index vs re-injury); (b) muscle injured (soleus vs gastrocnemius); and (c) mechanism of injury (running-related activity vs non running-related activity). STUDY DESIGN: Descriptive epidemiological. METHODS: Data retrieved from the Soft Tissue injury Registry of the Australian Football League were analyzed. Sixteen clubs submitted data on CMSI from 2014 to 2017. Data included: player characteristics, training and match history at the time of injury, MRI, and the time to reach recovery milestones. RESULTS: One hundred and eighty-four CMSI were included (149 index injuries; 35 re-injuries). Soleus injuries were most prevalent (84.6%). Soleus injuries took 25.4 ± 16.2 days to return to play, whereas gastrocnemius injuries took 19.1 ± 14.1 days (P = .097). CMSI sustained during running-related activities took approximately 12 days longer to recover than injuries sustained during non running-related activities (P = .001). Compared to index injuries, re-injuries involved older players (P = .03) and significantly more time was taken to run at >90% of maximum speed, return to full training, and return to play (P ≤ .001). Almost all of the observed re-injuries involved soleus (91.4%). CONCLUSION: Soleus injuries are more prevalent than gastrocnemius injuries in elite Australian Football players. Prognosis appears to be influenced by clinical factors, with CMSI sustained during running-related activities and re-injuries needing more time to recover.

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries commonly occur during single‐leg landing tasks and are a burdensome condition. Previous studies indicate that muscle forces play an important role in controlling ligamentous loading, yet these studies have typically used cadaveric models considering only the knee‐spanning quadriceps, hamstrings, and gastrocnemius muscle groups. Any muscles (including non‐knee‐spanning muscles) capable of opposing the anterior shear joint reaction force and the valgus joint reaction moment are thought to have the greatest potential for protecting the ACL from injury. Thus, the purpose of this study was to investigate how lower‐limb muscles modulate knee joint loading during a single‐leg drop landing task. An electromyography‐informed neuromusculoskeletal modeling approach was used to compute lower‐limb muscle force contributions to the anterior shear joint reaction force and the valgus joint reaction moment at the knee during a single‐leg drop landing task. The average shear joint reaction force ranged from 153 N of anterior shear force to 744 N of posterior shear force. The muscles that generated the greatest posterior shear force were the soleus, medial hamstrings, and biceps femoris, contributing up to 393 N, 359 N, and 162 N, respectively. The average frontal plane joint reaction moment ranged from a 19 Nm varus moment to a 6 Nm valgus moment. The valgus moment was primarily opposed by the gluteus medius, gluteus minimus, and soleus, with these muscles providing contributions of up to 38, 22, and 20 Nm toward a varus moment, respectively. The findings identify key muscles that mitigate loads on the ACL.

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries are a burdensome condition due to potential surgical requirements and increased risk of long term debilitation. Previous studies indicate that muscle forces play an important role in the development of ligamentous loading, yet these studies have typically used cadaveric models considering only the knee-spanning quadriceps, hamstrings and gastrocnemius muscle groups. Using a musculoskeletal modelling approach, we investigated how lower-limb muscles produce and oppose key tibiofemoral reaction forces and moments during the weight acceptance phase of unanticipated sidestep cutting. Muscles capable of opposing (or controlling the magnitude of) the anterior shear force and the external valgus moment at the knee are thought to be have the greatest potential for protecting the anterior cruciate ligament from injury. We found the best muscles for generating posterior shear to be the soleus, biceps femoris long head and medial hamstrings, providing up to 173N, 111N and 77N of force directly opposing the anterior shear force. The valgus moment was primarily opposed by the gluteus medius, gluteus maximus and piriformis, with these muscles providing contributions of up to 32 Nm, 19 Nm and 21 Nm towards a knee varus moment, respectively. Our findings highlight key muscle targets for ACL preventative and rehabilitative interventions.

The primary human ankle plantarflexors, soleus (SO), medial gastrocnemius (MG), and lateral gastrocnemius (LG) are typically regarded as synergists and play a critical role in running. However, due to differences in muscle-tendon architecture and joint articulation, the muscle fascicles and tendinous tissue of the plantarflexors may exhibit differences in their behavior and interactions during running. We combined in vivo dynamic ultrasound measurements with inverse dynamics analyses to identify and explain differences in muscle fascicle, muscle-tendon unit, and tendinous tissue behavior of the primary ankle plantarflexors across a range of steady-state running speeds. Consistent with their role as a force generator, the muscle fascicles of the uniarticular SO shortened less rapidly than the fascicles of the MG during early stance. Furthermore, the MG and LG exhibited delays in tendon recoil during the stance phase, reflecting their ability to transfer power and work between the knee and ankle via tendon stretch and storage of elastic strain energy. Our findings add to the growing body of evidence surrounding the distinct mechanistic functions of uni- and biarticular muscles during dynamic movements.

BACKGROUND: Although muscle mass declines with testosterone deficiency in men, previous studies of muscle function have not demonstrated consistent deficits, likely due to relatively insensitive methodology. Our objective was to determine the effects of testosterone deprivation on the biomechanical function of individual lower-limb muscles. METHODS: We conducted a 12-month prospective, observational case-control study of 34 men newly commencing androgen deprivation treatment (ADT) for prostate cancer and 29 age-matched prostate cancer controls. Participants were assessed at 0, 6, and 12 months while walking in a biomechanics laboratory. We combined video-based motion capture and ground reaction force data with computerized musculoskeletal modelling to assess the following primary outcomes: (i) peak joint torques at the hip, knee and ankle, and corresponding individual muscle forces; (ii) individual muscle contributions to acceleration of the body's centre of mass; and (iii) walking speed, stride length, and step width. A linear mixed model was used to compare mean differences between groups. RESULTS: Compared with controls over 12 months, men receiving ADT had a mean reduction in total testosterone level from 14.1 to 0.4 nmol/L, and demonstrated more marked decreases in peak hip flexor torque by 14% [mean difference -0.11 N/kg (-0.19, -0.03), P = 0.01] and peak knee extensor torque by 16% [-0.11 N/kg (-0.20, -0.02), P = 0.02] of the initial mean value. Correspondingly, iliopsoas force decreased by 14% (P = 0.006), and quadriceps force decreased by 11%, although this narrowly missed statistical significance (P = 0.07). Soleus decreased contribution to forward acceleration of the body's centre of mass by 17% [mean difference -0.17 m/s2 (-0.29, -0.05), P < 0.01]. No significant changes between groups were observed in other joint torques or individual muscle contributions to acceleration of the body. Step width increased by 18% [mean adjusted difference 1.4 cm (0.6, 27.

We investigated how the human lower-limb joints modulate work and power during walking and running on level ground. Experimental data were recorded from seven participants for a broad range of steady-state locomotion speeds (walking at 1.59±0.09 m s(-1) to sprinting at 8.95±0.70 m s(-1)). We calculated hip, knee and ankle work and average power (i.e. over time), along with the relative contribution from each joint towards the total (sum of hip, knee and ankle) amount of work and average power produced by the lower limb. Irrespective of locomotion speed, ankle positive work was greatest during stance, whereas hip positive work was greatest during swing. Ankle positive work increased with faster locomotion until a running speed of 5.01±0.11 m s(-1), where it plateaued at ∼1.3 J kg(-1). In contrast, hip positive work during stance and swing, as well as knee negative work during swing, all increased when running speed progressed beyond 5.01±0.11 m s(-1). When switching from walking to running at the same speed (∼2.0 m s(-1)), the ankle's contribution to the average power generated (and positive work done) by the lower limb during stance significantly increased from 52.7±10.4% to 65.3±7.5% (P=0.001), whereas the hip's contribution significantly decreased from 23.0±9.7% to 5.5±4.6% (P=0.004). With faster running, the hip's contribution to the average power generated (and positive work done) by the lower limb significantly increased during stance (P<0.001) and swing (P=0.003). Our results suggest that changing locomotion mode and faster steady-state running speeds are not simply achieved via proportional increases in work and average power at the lower-limb joints.

BACKGROUND: Heterogeneous taxonomy of groin injuries in athletes adds confusion to this complicated area. AIM: The 'Doha agreement meeting on terminology and definitions in groin pain in athletes' was convened to attempt to resolve this problem. Our aim was to agree on a standard terminology, along with accompanying definitions. METHODS: A one-day agreement meeting was held on 4 November 2014. Twenty-four international experts from 14 different countries participated. Systematic reviews were performed to give an up-to-date synthesis of the current evidence on major topics concerning groin pain in athletes. All members participated in a Delphi questionnaire prior to the meeting. RESULTS: Unanimous agreement was reached on the following terminology. The classification system has three major subheadings of groin pain in athletes: 1. Defined clinical entities for groin pain: Adductor-related, iliopsoas-related, inguinal-related and pubic-related groin pain. 2. Hip-related groin pain. 3. Other causes of groin pain in athletes. The definitions are included in this paper. CONCLUSIONS: The Doha agreement meeting on terminology and definitions in groin pain in athletes reached a consensus on a clinically based taxonomy using three major categories. These definitions and terminology are based on history and physical examination to categorise athletes, making it simple and suitable for both clinical practice and research.

Stair ambulation is more physically demanding than level walking because it requires the lower-limb muscles to generate greater net joint moments. Although lower-limb joint kinematics and kinetics during stair ambulation have been extensively studied, relatively little is known about how the lower-limb muscles accelerate the whole-body center of mass (COM) during stair ascent and descent. The aim of the current study was to evaluate differences in muscle contributions to COM accelerations between level walking and stair ambulation in 15 healthy adults. Three-dimensional quantitative gait analysis and musculoskeletal modeling were used to calculate the contributions of the individual lower-limb muscles to the vertical, fore-aft and mediolateral accelerations of the COM (support, progression, and balance, respectively) during level walking, stair ascent and stair descent. Muscles that contribute most significantly to the acceleration of the COM during level walking (hip, knee, and ankle extensors) also dominate during stair ambulation, but with noticeable differences in coordination. In stair ascent, gluteus maximus accelerates the body forward during the first half of stance and soleus accelerates the body backward during the second half of stance, opposite to the functions displayed by these muscles in level walking. In stair descent, vasti generates backward and medial accelerations of the COM during the second half of stance, whereas it contributes minimally during this period in level walking. Gluteus medius performs similarly in controlling mediolateral balance during level walking and stair ambulation. Differences in lower-limb muscular coordination exist between stair ambulation and level walking, and our results have implications for interventions aimed at preventing stair-related falls.

Background Groin pain in athletes occurs frequently and can be difficult to treat, which may partly be due to the lack of agreement on diagnostic terminology. Objective To perform a short Delphi survey on terminology agreement for groin pain in athletes by a group of experts. Methods A selected number of experts were invited to participate in a Delphi questionnaire. The study coordinator sent a questionnaire, which consisted of demographic questions and two 'real-life' case reports of athletes with groin pain. The experts were asked to complete the questionnaire and to provide the most likely diagnosis for each case. Questionnaire responses were analysed by an independent researcher. The Cohen's. statistic was used to evaluate the level of agreement between the diagnostic terms provided by the experts. Results Twenty-three experts participated (96% of those invited). For case 1, experts provided 9 different terms to describe the most likely diagnosis; for case 2, 11 different terms were provided to describe the most likely diagnosis. With respect to the terms provided for the most likely diagnosis, the Cohen's. was 0.06 and 0.002 for case 1 and 2, respectively. This heterogeneous taxonomy reflects only a slight agreement between the various diagnostic terms provided by the selected experts. Conclusions This short Delphi survey of two 'typical, straightforward' cases demonstrated major inconsistencies in the diagnostic terminology used by experts for groin pain in athletes. These results underscore the need for consensus on definitions and terminology on groin pain in athletes.

Background Heterogeneous taxonomy of groin injuries in athletes adds confusion to this complicated area. Aim The 'Doha agreement meeting on terminology and definitions in groin pain in athletes' was convened to attempt to resolve this problem. Our aim was to agree on a standard terminology, along with accompanying definitions. Methods A one-day agreement meeting was held on 4 November 2014. Twenty-four international experts from 14 different countries participated. Systematic reviews were performed to give an up-to-date synthesis of the current evidence on major topics concerning groin pain in athletes. All members participated in a Delphi questionnaire prior to the meeting. Results Unanimous agreement was reached on the following terminology. The classification system has three major subheadings of groin pain in athletes: 1. Defined clinical entities for groin pain: Adductor-related, iliopsoas-related, inguinal-related and pubic-related groin pain. 2. Hip-related groin pain. 3. Other causes of groin pain in athletes. The definitions are included in this paper. Conclusions The Doha agreement meeting on terminology and definitions in groin pain in athletes reached a consensus on a clinically based taxonomy using three major categories. These definitions and terminology are based on history and physical examination to categorise athletes, making it simple and suitable for both clinical practice and research.

OBJECTIVE: Patellofemoral (PF) osteoarthritis (OA) is prevalent following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). This study aimed to investigate differences in transverse plane rotation between knees with varus and valgus alignment during gait in people with and without PFOA after ACLR. METHODS: Thirty-six individuals who were mean ± SD 9 ± 2 years post-ACLR (18 radiographic PFOA and 18 no knee OA) participated in this cross-sectional study. Knee internal-external rotation angles were measured using a 3-dimensional motion analysis system during walking and running. Weight-bearing frontal plane knee alignment, measured with an inclinometer, was used to classify participants as having varus or valgus alignment. Two-way analysis of covariance was used to assess the effect of both PFOA and frontal plane knee alignment on dynamic knee internal-external rotation. RESULTS: Significant interactions were found between PFOA status and frontal plane alignment on knee internal-external rotation angles during walking (P = 0.019) and running (P = 0.002). Tests of simple effects revealed that during walking, individuals with valgus alignment and PFOA demonstrated a mean 3.9° (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.7, 7.1) less knee internal rotation than those with valgus alignment and no OA. During running this difference increased to 6.1° (95% CI 1.8, 10.4). For individuals with varus alignment, no significant effects were observed. CONCLUSION: Less knee internal rotation during gait was found in individuals with PFOA and valgus alignment. A rotational shift of this magnitude may be sufficient to initiate or accelerate patellofemoral cartilage degeneration. Prospective studies are required to determine if these altered kinematic patterns result from, or contribute to, PFOA development after reconstruction.

PURPOSE: The human biarticular hamstrings [semimembranosus (SM), semitendinosus (ST) and biceps femoris long head (BF(LH))] have an important role in running. This study determined how hamstrings neuro-mechanical behaviour changed with faster running, and whether differences existed between SM, ST and BF(LH). METHODS: Whole-body kinematics and hamstrings electromyographic (EMG) activity were measured from seven participants running at four discrete speeds (range: 3.4 ± 0.1 to 9.0 ± 0.7 m/s). Kinematic data were combined with a three-dimensional musculoskeletal model to calculate muscle-tendon unit (MTU) stretch and velocity. Activation duration and magnitude were determined from EMG data. RESULTS: With faster running, MTU stretch and velocity patterns remained similar, but maxima and minima significantly increased. The hamstrings were activated from foot-strike until terminal stance or early swing, and then again from mid-swing until foot-strike. Activation duration was similar with faster running, whereas activation magnitude significantly increased. Hamstrings activation almost always ended before minimum MTU stretch, and it always started before maximum MTU stretch. Comparing the hamstrings, maximum MTU stretch was largest for BF(LH) and smallest for ST irrespective of running speed, while the opposite was true for peak-to-peak MTU stretch. Furthermore, peak MTU shortening velocity was largest for ST and smallest for BF(LH) at all running speeds. Finally, for the two fastest running speeds, the amount of MTU stretch that occurred during terminal swing after activation had started was less for BF(LH) compared to SM and ST. CONCLUSION: Differences were evident in biarticular hamstrings neuro-mechanical behaviour during running. Such findings have implications for hamstrings function and injury.

We investigated the immediate effects of a varus knee brace on knee symptoms and knee-joint biomechanics in an individual with predominant lateral tibiofemoral joint osteoarthritis (TFJOA) and valgus malalignment after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. A varus unloader brace was prescribed to a 48-year-old male with predominant lateral radiographic and symptomatic TFJOA and valgus malalignment eight-years following ACL reconstruction. During a step-down task, the participant rated knee pain, task-difficulty, knee-stability and knee-confidence on four separate visual analogue scales. Quantitative gait analysis was conducted during self-selected walking trials under three test conditions in a randomized order: (i) no brace; (ii) brace without frontal plane adjustment (no varus re-alignment); and (ii) brace with frontal plane adjustment (varus re-alignment). Post-processing of gait data involved calculation of knee kinematics and net joint moments for the reconstructed limb. The participant reported improved pain (3%), task difficulty (41%), stability (46%) and confidence (49%) when performing the step-down task with the brace. The varus brace resulted in immediate reductions in knee abduction angle (24%) and internal rotation angle (56%), and increased knee adduction moment (18%). These findings provide preliminary evidence for potentially beneficial effects of bracing on knee-symptoms and biomechanics in individuals with lateral TFJOA after reconstruction.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether people with patellofemoral (PF) joint osteoarthritis (OA) ascend and descend stairs with different PF joint loading, knee joint moments, lower limb kinematics, and muscle forces compared to healthy people. METHODS: We recruited 17 participants with isolated PF joint OA, 13 participants with concurrent PF joint OA and tibiofemoral (TF) joint OA, and 21 age-matched controls. Joint kinematics and ground reaction forces were measured while participants ascended and descended stairs at a self-selected speed. Musculoskeletal computer modeling was used to determine lower limb muscle forces and the PF joint reaction force, and these parameters were compared between groups by analysis of variance. RESULTS: Compared to their healthy counterparts, participants with isolated PF joint OA and participants with concurrent PF and TF joint OA ascended and descended stairs with lower knee extension moments, lower quadriceps muscle forces, lower PF joint reaction forces, and increased anterior pelvic tilt. Participants with OA also ascended stairs with increased hip flexion angles and descended stairs with smaller knee flexion angles and smaller hip abductor muscle forces. No differences were evident between the two groups with OA. CONCLUSION: Compared to their healthy counterparts, people with PF joint OA (with or without concurrent TF joint OA) exhibit lower PF joint reaction forces during stair ascent and descent, in conjunction with lower knee extension moments and lower quadriceps muscle forces.

OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to (1) assess whether higher vasti (VASTI), gluteus medius (GMED), gluteus maximus (GMAX) and gluteus minimus (GMIN) forces are associated with participant characteristics (lower age, male gender) and clinical characteristics (lower radiographic disease severity, lower symptom severity and higher walking speed); and (2) determine whether hip and knee muscle forces are lower in people with patellofemoral joint (PFJ) osteoarthritis (OA) compared to those without PFJ OA. DESIGN: Sixty participants with PFJ OA and 18 (asymptomatic, no radiographic OA) controls ≥40 years were recruited from the community or via referrals. A three-dimensional musculoskeletal model was used in conjunction with optimisation theory to calculate lower-limb muscle forces during walking. Associations of peak muscle forces with participant and clinical characteristics were conducted using Pearson's r or independent t-tests and between-group comparisons of mean peak muscle forces performed with walking speed as a covariate. RESULTS: Peak muscle forces were not significantly associated with participant, symptomatic or radiographic-specific characteristics. Faster walking speed was associated with higher VASTI muscle force in the PFJ OA (r = 0.495; P < 0.001) and control groups (r = 0.727; P = 0.001) and higher GMAX muscle force (r = 0.593; P = 0.009) in the control group only. Individuals with PFJ OA (N = 60) walked with lower GMED and GMIN muscle forces than controls (N = 18): GMED, mean difference 0.15 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.01 to 0.29] body weight (BW); GMIN, 0.03 [0.01 to 0.06] BW. No between-group differences were observed in VASTI or GMAX muscle force: VASTI, 0.10 [-0.11 to 0.31] BW; GMAX, 0.01 [-0.11 to 0.09] BW. CONCLUSION: Individuals with PFJ OA ambulate with lower peak hip abductor muscle forces than their healthy counterparts.

BACKGROUND: The patellofemoral joint (PFJ) is one compartment of the knee that is frequently affected by osteoarthritis (OA) and is a potent source of OA symptoms. However, there is a dearth of evidence for compartment-specific treatments for PFJ OA. Therefore, this project aims to evaluate whether a physiotherapy treatment, targeted to the PFJ, results in greater improvements in pain and physical function than a physiotherapy education intervention in people with symptomatic and radiographic PFJ OA. METHODS: 90 people with PFJ OA (PFJ-specific history, signs and symptoms and radiographic evidence of PFJ OA) will be recruited from the community and randomly allocated into one of two treatments. A randomised controlled trial adhering to CONSORT guidelines will evaluate the efficacy of physiotherapy (8 individual sessions over 12 weeks, as well as a home exercise program 4 times/week) compared to a physiotherapist-delivered OA education control treatment (8 individual sessions over 12 weeks). Physiotherapy treatment will consist of (i) quadriceps muscle retraining; (ii) quadriceps and hip muscle strengthening; (iii) patellar taping; (iv) manual PFJ and soft tissue mobilisation; and (v) OA education. Resistance and dosage of exercises will be tailored to the participant's functional level and clinical state. Primary outcomes will be evaluated by a blinded examiner at baseline, 12 weeks and 9 months using validated and reliable pain, physical function and perceived global effect scales. All analyses will be conducted on an intention-to-treat basis using linear mixed regression models, including respective baseline scores as a covariate, subjects as a random effect, treatment condition as a fixed factor and the covariate by treatment interaction. CONCLUSION: This RCT is targeting PFJ OA, an important sub-group of knee OA patients, with a specifically designed conservative intervention. The project's outcome will influence PFJ OA rehabilitation, with the potential to redu