Conference PaperPDF Available

Hand reach star excursion balance test as a measure of joint mobility

Authors:
  • Luxembourg Institute of Research in Orthopedics, Sports Medicine and Science (LIROMS)

Abstract and Figures

Joint range of motion (ROM) is commonly measured using goniometry with accepted reference values such as American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons (AAOS) (Greene & Heckman, 1994). The procedures of obtaining these measures are based on unidirectional and uniplanar passive testing of isolated joint motions in supine, prone or seated positions. The relationship of such ROM measures to performance have been found to be variable (Craib et al., 1996; Menz, Morris, & Lord, 2006). Utilizing tests of the full kinematic chain from an upright standing position that involve the concurrent use of multiple joints, directions and planes of motion might be one solution to the shortcomings of the traditional ROM testing procedures. Full kinematic chain tests have the advantage of greater specificity to most human movements such as athletic performance. The Star Excursion Balance Test (SEBT) is a widely accepted test of dynamic postural control and balance (Gribble, Hertel, & Plisky, 2012) that challenges coordination, mobility, and strength (Hubbard, Kramer, Denegar, & Hertel, 2007). However it does not challenge all joint movements at and above the hip (Delahunt et al., 2013), but it offers a platform from which a whole-body mobility and balance test can be created. In the current study we propose a Hand Reach Star Excursion Balance Test (HSEBT), which combines a systematic use of unilateral and bilateral hand reaches, thus also challenging mobility in hip and upper body joints. The purposes of this study were to (1) provide joint movement reference data for HSEBT; and (2) compare the 22 elicited joint movements of the ankle, knee, hip and spine elicited by HSEBT to ROM reference values and joint movements elicited by SEBT.
Content may be subject to copyright.
Hand reach star excursion balance test as a measure of joint mobility
Eriksrud, O.1, Cabri, J.1 and Federolf, P.2
1Department of Physical Performance, Norwegian School of Sport Sciences, Oslo, Norway
2Faculty of Psychology and Sport Science, University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
{ola.eriksrud, jan.cabri}@nih.no, peter.federolf@uibk.ac.at
1 OBJECTIVES
Joint range of motion (ROM) is commonly
measured using goniometry with accepted reference
values such as American Academy of Orthopedic
Surgeons (AAOS) (Greene & Heckman, 1994). The
procedures of obtaining these measures are based on
unidirectional and uniplanar passive testing of
isolated joint motions in supine, prone or seated
positions.
The relationship of such ROM measures to
performance have been found to be variable (Craib
et al., 1996; Menz, Morris, & Lord, 2006). Utilizing
tests of the full kinematic chain from an upright
standing position that involve the concurrent use of
multiple joints, directions and planes of motion
might be one solution to the shortcomings of the
traditional ROM testing procedures. Full kinematic
chain tests have the advantage of greater specificity
to most human movements such as athletic
performance.
The Star Excursion Balance Test (SEBT) is a
widely accepted test of dynamic postural control and
balance (Gribble, Hertel, & Plisky, 2012) that
challenges coordination, mobility, and strength
(Hubbard, Kramer, Denegar, & Hertel, 2007).
However it does not challenge all joint movements
at and above the hip (Delahunt et al., 2013), but it
offers a platform from which a whole-body mobility
and balance test can be created. In the current study
we propose a Hand Reach Star Excursion Balance
Test (HSEBT), which combines a systematic use of
unilateral and bilateral hand reaches, thus also
challenging mobility in hip and upper body joints.
The purposes of this study were to (1) provide
joint movement reference data for HSEBT; and (2)
compare the 22 elicited joint movements of the
ankle, knee, hip and spine elicited by HSEBT to
ROM reference values and joint movements elicited
by SEBT.
2 METHODS
Twenty-eight healthy male subjects without
musculoskeletal dysfunction in the past 6 months
volunteered for the study. HSEBT was performed on
a testing grid that featured nine concentric circles at
10 cm intervals with eight vectors projecting from
the centre of the mat at 45° intervals and marked at
one centimetre intervals. The vectors were used as
reference for the horizontal reach tests (HR) and
named as follows: 1) Anterior (A0). 2) Left 45°
(L45). 3) Right 45° (R45). 4) Left 90° (L90). 5)
Right 90° (R90). 6) Left 135° (L135). 7) Right 135°
(R135) and 8) Posterior (P180). All HR are
measured in centimetres (cm). The rotational reaches
(RR) were measured in degrees (°) using the outer
concentric circle with degrees identified at 5°
intervals. When performing overhead or rotational
reaches a plumbline was used to project reach
distance to the mat. All subjects performed 20 hand
reaches, 10 on each leg, in the same order without
warming up.
Movements of the participants were captured
using 58 reflective markers and fifteen Oqus
cameras (ProReflex®, Qualisys Inc., Gothenburg,
Sweden) recording at 480 Hz to create the foot, leg,
thigh, pelvis, thorax and upper arm segment. Data
analysis was performed using Visual 3D® (C-
Motion Inc., Rockwille MD, USA).
Three-dimensional joint movements of the foot,
knee, hip and trunk (θ=ϕmax-ϕstart) triggered by
different hand reach tests were calculated from
starting (ϕstart = meanframes 5-100) and maximum reach
position (ϕmax) of the fifth metacarpal marker of the
reaching hand(s). The maximum reach position was
defined to reflect the maximum HR and RR scores.
Descriptive statistics were then calculated for all
joint movements and hand reach performance.
3 RESULTS
Twenty-eight healthy male subjects (age 23.8 ±
2.2 years; height 181 ± 6.0 cm; weight = 78.3 ± 9.2
kg) completed all 20 tests. The HSEBT test that
elicited the greatest joint movement, plane and
direction, of the ankle, knee, hip and spine is
identified in Table 1. HSEBT elicited eleven out of
twenty-two joint movements within or greater than
goniometric ROM reference values.
4 DISCUSSION
Dorsiflexion (29.2±6.0°) is greater than ROM
reference values. However, more appropriate
comparisons can be made to the weight bearing
modified lunge test (38,2°) (Menz et al., 2003). Foot
eversion (18.1±3.2°) is within ROM reference
values and similar to the test found to elicit
maximum ankle eversion in the SEBT (16.4±1.9°)
(Doherty et al., 2015). Inversion (7.8±4.4°) is not
within range of ROM reference values, however,
similar to what has been found for SEBT (7.1±1.9°)
(Kang et al., 2015). To the authors’ knowledge no
goniometric ROM for abduction and adduction exist,
however the joint movements obtained is similar to
stance phase of running (Freedman Silvernail,
Boyer, Rohr, Bruggemann, & Hamill, 2015).
Maximum knee flexion (94.3±22.4°) is below
ROM reference values, but greater than in the SEBT
(66.3°-68.9°) (Doherty et al., 2015; Kang et al.,
2015). Knee internal rotation is within the range
while external rotation is greater, (7.8°-26.6°) and
(5.3±14.7°) respectively, when compared to SEBT
(Doherty et al., 2015; Kang et al., 2015). The frontal
plane arch (23°) obtained in this study is greater than
the ROM reference values (Table 1), but similar to a
functional task such as a jump-stop unanticipated cut
(27°) (Ford, Myer, Toms, & Hewett, 2005)
Table 1: HSEBT joint movement comparison to selected ROM reference values.
Joint
Plane
Motion
Test
°)
ROM reference values (°)
Foot
Sag
DF
R45
11-27 (Lindsjo, Danckwardt-Lilliestrom, & Sahlstedt,
1985; Mudge et al., 2013)
Sag
PF
LROT
36-56 (Boone & Azen, 1979; Lindsjo et al., 1985)
Front
Ev
R90
13-34 Schwarz, 2011 #1564;Macedo, 2009 #1567}
Front
Inv
L90
21-43 (Macedo & Magee, 2009; Schwarz, Kovaleski,
Heitman, Gurchiek, & Gubler-Hanna, 2011)
Trans
Abd
RROT
NR
Trans
Add
LROT
NR
Knee
Sag
Flex
A0
132-149 (Macedo & Magee, 2009; Roach & Miles,
1991)
Sag
Ext
RROT
-2 -4 (Boone & Azen, 1979; Mudge et al., 2013)
Front
Abd
LROT
frontal plane movement arch of 13° at 20° of knee
flexion (Levangie & Norkin, 2011).
Front
Add
R45
Trans
IR
LROT
15 (Almquist et al., 2002)
Trans
ER
RROT
20 (Almquist et al., 2002)
Hip
Sag
Flex
R45
113-133 (Macedo & Magee, 2009; Sankar, Laird, &
Baldwin, 2012)
Sag
Ext
L135
3-19 (Moreside & McGill, 2011; Roach & Miles, 1991)
Front
Abd
L90
34-60 (Macedo & Magee, 2009; Sankar et al., 2012)
Front
Add
R90
14-31 (Roaas & Andersson, 1982; Sankar et al., 2012)
Trans
IR
LROT
27-58 (Moreside & McGill, 2011; Mudge et al., 2013)
Trans
ER
RROT
32-48
(Mudge et al., 2013; Roach & Miles, 1991)
Trunk
Sag
Flex
A0
Lumbar: 40-60 Thoracic: 20-45 (Magee, 2006)
Sag
Ext
P180
Lumbar: 20-35 Thoracic: 25-40 (Magee, 2006)
Front
Lat Flex
L90/R90
Lumbar: 15-20 Thoracic: 20-40 (Magee, 2006)
Trans
Rot
LROT/RROT
Lumbar: Rot: 3-18 Thoracic: 35-50 (Magee, 2006)
1= kinematic average of two tests
2= within or greater than range of ROM reference values
Abbreviations: NR=None Reported; L=Left; R=Right; B=Bilateral; DF=Dorsiflexion; PF=Plantarflexion; Ev=Eversion;
Inv=Inversion; Abd=Abduction; Add=Adduction; Flex=Flexion; Ext=Extension; IR=Internal Rotation; ER=External
Rotation; Lat Flexion= Lateral flexion; Rot=Rotation
HSEBT is eliciting more hip flexion than the
SEBT (72.0°-77.0°) (Doherty et al., 2015; Kang et
al., 2015). Hip extension is greater than ROM
reference values, but closer to what have been
observed in activities thought to require hip
extension such as sprint running (22°) (Kivi, Maraj,
& Gervais, 2002) and football kick (25°) (Smith &
Gilleard, 2015). In comparison, SEBT does not
challenge hip extension. Both hip internal and
external rotation are at the lower end of ROM
reference values. The rotational values are greater
than the internal (4.3°-8.0°) and external rotation
(5.2°-23.5°) values reported for the SEBT (Doherty
et al., 2015; Kang et al., 2015; Robinson & Gribble,
2008). Hip adduction is within ROM reference
values and greater than what has been found with the
SEBT (15°) (Doherty et al., 2015). Hip abduction is
less than ROM reference values, but similar to
SEBT (15°) (Robinson & Gribble, 2008).
Spine movements elicited by the HSEBT are
representative of both lumbar and thoracic spine
movement. The HSEBT is able to elicit flexion and
lateral flexion within, and extension, and rotation
just outside range of ROM reference values (Magee,
2006). SEBT do not elicit spine movements within
ROM reference values. However, selected
movements do predict reach distance (Kang et al.,
2015), which might indicate their importance in
balance and postural adjustments.
HSEBT elicits unique combinations of
movements in ankle joint complex, knee, hip and
spine. Observed joint movements, nine of twenty-
two possible, were within the ranges of goniometric
ROM reference values, while two (ankle
dorsiflexion and hip extension) where greater. In
comparison to the SEBT, the HSEBT elicits similar
or lower values for the ankle, but greater values for
the knee, hip and spine. In addition, hip extension
and spine movements are elicited by the HSEBT and
not SEBT. HSEBT offers a new and promising
approach to functional mobility testing that
integrates the full kinematic chain.
REFERENCES
Almquist, P. O., Arnbjornsson, A., Zatterstrom, R.,
Ryd, L., Ekdahl, C., & Friden, T. (2002).
Evaluation of an external device measuring
knee joint rotation: an in vivo study with
simultaneous Roentgen stereometric
analysis. Journal of orthopaedic research :
official publication of the Orthopaedic
Research Society, 20(3), 427-432.
doi:10.1016/S0736-0266(01)00148-6
Boone, D. C., & Azen, S. P. (1979). Normal range
of motion of joints in male subjects. J.Bone
Joint Surg.Am., 61(5), 756-759. Retrieved
from PM:457719
Craib, M. W., Mitchell, V. A., Fields, K. B., Cooper,
T. R., Hopewell, R., & Morgan, D. W.
(1996). The association between flexibility
and running economy in sub-elite male
distance runners. Med.Sci.Sports Exerc.,
28(6), 737-743. Retrieved from
PM:8784761
Delahunt, E., Chawke, M., Kelleher, J., Murphy, K.,
Prendiville, A., Sweeny, L., & Patterson,
M. (2013). Lower limb kinematics and
dynamic postural stability in anterior
cruciate ligament-reconstructed female
athletes. Journal of athletic training, 48(2),
172-185. doi:10.4085/1062-6050-48.2.05
Doherty, C., Bleakley, C. M., Hertel, J., Caulfield,
B., Ryan, J., & Delahunt, E. (2015).
Laboratory Measures of Postural Control
During the Star Excursion Balance Test
After Acute First-Time Lateral Ankle
Sprain. Journal of athletic training, 50(6),
651-664. doi:10.4085/1062-6050-50.1.09
Ford, K. R., Myer, G. D., Toms, H. E., & Hewett, T.
E. (2005). Gender differences in the
kinematics of unanticipated cutting in
young athletes. Med Sci Sports Exerc,
37(1), 124-129. Retrieved from
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1563
2678
Freedman Silvernail, J., Boyer, K., Rohr, E.,
Bruggemann, G. P., & Hamill, J. (2015).
Running Mechanics and Variability with
Aging. Med Sci Sports Exerc.
doi:10.1249/MSS.0000000000000633
Greene, W., & Heckman, J. D. (1994). The clinical
measurement of joint motion. Rosemont,
IL: American Academy of Orthopedic
Surgeons.
Gribble, P. A., Hertel, J., & Plisky, P. (2012). Using
the Star Excursion Balance Test to assess
dynamic postural-control deficits and
outcomes in lower extremity injury: a
literature and systematic review. Journal of
athletic training, 47(3), 339-357.
doi:10.4085/1062-6050-47.3.08
Hubbard, T. J., Kramer, L. C., Denegar, C. R., &
Hertel, J. (2007). Contributing factors to
chronic ankle instability. Foot Ankle Int,
28(3), 343-354.
doi:10.3113/FAI.2007.0343
Kang, M. H., Kim, G. M., Kwon, O. Y., Weon, J.
H., Oh, J. S., & An, D. H. (2015).
Relationship Between the Kinematics of the
Trunk and Lower Extremity and
Performance on the Y-Balance Test. PM &
R : the journal of injury, function, and
rehabilitation.
doi:10.1016/j.pmrj.2015.05.004
Kivi, D. M., Maraj, B. K., & Gervais, P. (2002). A
kinematic analysis of high-speed treadmill
sprinting over a range of velocities. Med
Sci Sports Exerc, 34(4), 662-666.
Retrieved from
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1193
2576
Levangie, P. K., & Norkin, C. C. (2011). Joint
Structure and function a comprehensive
analysis, 5th Ed. Philadelphia, PA: F. A.
Davis Company.
Lindsjo, U., Danckwardt-Lilliestrom, G., &
Sahlstedt, B. (1985). Measurement of the
motion range in the loaded ankle. Clinical
orthopaedics and related research(199),
68-71. Retrieved from
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4042
498
Macedo, L. G., & Magee, D. J. (2009). Effects of
age on passive range of motion of selected
peripheral joints in healthy adult females.
Physiother Theory Pract, 25(2), 145-164.
doi:10.1080/09593980802686870
Magee, D. J. (2006). Orthopedic physical
assessment, 4th Ed: Saunder, Philadelphia,
PA. (Reprinted from: NOT IN FILE).
Menz, H. B., Morris, M. E., & Lord, S. R. (2006).
Foot and ankle risk factors for falls in older
people: a prospective study. J Gerontol A
Biol Sci Med Sci, 61(8), 866-870.
Retrieved from
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1691
2106
Menz, H. B., Tiedemann, A., Kwan, M. M., Latt, M.
D., Sherrington, C., & Lord, S. R. (2003).
Reliability of clinical tests of foot and ankle
characteristics in older people. J Am
Podiatr Med Assoc, 93(5), 380-387.
Retrieved from
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1313
0085
Moreside, J. M., & McGill, S. M. (2011).
Quantifying normal 3D hip ROM in
healthy young adult males with clinical and
laboratory tools: hip mobility restrictions
appear to be plane-specific. Clinical
biomechanics, 26(8), 824-829.
doi:10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2011.03.015
Mudge, A. J., Bau, K. V., Purcell, L. N., Wu, J. C.,
Axt, M., J., Selber, P., & Burns, J. (2013).
Normative reference values of lower limb
joint range, bone torsion, and alignment in
children aged 4-16 years. J Pediatr Orthop,
23, 15-25.
Roaas, A., & Andersson, G. B. (1982). Normal
range of motion of the hip, knee and ankle
joints in male subjects, 30-40 years of age.
Acta Orthop Scand, 53(2), 205-208.
Retrieved from
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7136
564
Roach, K. E., & Miles, T. P. (1991). Normal hip and
knee active range of motion: the
relationship to age. Phys.Ther., 71(9), 656-
665. Retrieved from PM:1881956
Robinson, R., & Gribble, P. (2008). Kinematic
predictors of performance on the Star
Excursion Balance Test. Journal of sport
rehabilitation, 17(4), 347-357. Retrieved
from
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1916
0909
Sankar, W. N., Laird, C. T., & Baldwin, K. D.
(2012). Hip range of motion in children:
what is the norm? J Pediatr Orthop, 32(4),
399-405.
doi:10.1097/BPO.0b013e3182519683
Schwarz, N. A., Kovaleski, J. E., Heitman, R. J.,
Gurchiek, L. R., & Gubler-Hanna, C.
(2011). Arthrometric measurement of
ankle-complex motion: normative values.
Journal of athletic training, 46(2), 126-132.
doi:10.4085/1062-6050-46.2.126
Smith, T., & Gilleard, W. (2015). Three-dimensional
analysis of a lofted instep kick by male and
female footballers. Eur J Sport Sci, 1-8.
doi:10.1080/17461391.2014.992477
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Article
Full-text available
The lower quarter Y-balance test (YBT-LQ) has been recommended as a measure of dynamic postural control in the clinical setting; however, information about the relationship between performance on the YBT-LQ and joint kinematics is limited. Thus, the kinematic predictors responsible for performance on the YBT-LQ need to be identified for accurate evaluation of dynamic postural control. To identify the kinematic predictors that best explain variance in performance on the YBT-LQ. Cross-sectional design. University motion analysis laboratory. Thirty physically active participants. All participants performed the YBT-LQ. The kinematics of the trunk and lower extremity at maximal reach in each direction of the YBT-LQ were monitored using a 3-D motion analysis system. The correlations between reach distance and joint kinematics were assessed using Pearson's correlation coefficient, and the best predictors of performance on the YBT-LQ were determined using a step-wise multiple regression analysis. Ankle dorsiflexion was the best single predictor of normalized reach in the anterior direction of the YBT-LQ (r(2) = 0.50), and the combination of ankle dorsiflexion and trunk extension explained 65% of the variance in the anterior normalized reach. Hip flexion was the best single predictor of posteromedial (r(2) = 0.60) and posterolateral (r(2) = 0.71) normalized reaches of the YBT-LQ. The combination of hip flexion and ipsilateral trunk bending and the combination of hip flexion and contralateral trunk bending accounted for 69% and 80% of the variance in the posteromedial and posterolateral normalized reaches of the YBT-LQ, respectively. These findings provide useful information on the relative contribution of joint kinematics to performance on the YBT-LQ when evaluating dynamic postural control. Copyright © 2015 American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Article
Full-text available
Normative reference values are essential to identify deviation from normal and evaluate response to treatment. As joint range of motion datasets specific to the pediatric population are infrequently reported in the literature, we determined lower limb passive joint range of motion and bone torsion values from 53 typically developing children aged 4-16 years. Our reference values were consistent with previously published norms, although for some measures, large variability in the literature exists. A clear correlation between joint range and age was observed in most measures. Our results highlight the importance of applying age-matched norms when attempting to identify deviation from normal in the growing child.
Article
Full-text available
Valid and reliable measurements of ankle-complex motion have been reported using the Hollis Ankle Arthrometer. No published normative data of ankle-complex motion obtained from ankle arthrometry are available for use as a reference for clinical decision making. To describe the distribution variables of ankle-complex motion in uninjured ankles and to establish normative reference values for use in research and to assist in clinical decision making. Descriptive laboratory study. University research laboratory. Both ankles of 50 men and 50 women (age = 21.78 ± 2.0 years [range, 19-25 years]) were tested. Each ankle underwent anteroposterior (AP) and inversion-eversion (I-E) loading using an ankle arthrometer. Recorded anterior, posterior, and total AP displacement (millimeters) at 125 N and inversion, eversion, and total I-E rotation (degrees) at 4 Nm. Women had greater ankle-complex motion for all variables except for posterior displacement. Total AP displacement of the ankle complex was 18.79 ± 4.1 mm for women and 16.70 ± 4.8 mm for men (U = 3742.5, P < .01). Total I-E rotation of the ankle complex was 42.10 degrees ± 9.0 degrees for women and 34.13 degrees ± 10.1 degrees for men (U = 2807, P < .001). All variables were normally distributed except for anterior displacement, inversion rotation, eversion rotation, and total I-E rotation in the women's ankles and eversion rotation in the men's ankles; these variables were skewed positively. Our study increases the available database on ankle-complex motion, and it forms the basis of norm-referenced clinical comparisons and the basis on which quantitative definitions of ankle pathologic conditions can be developed.
Article
Full-text available
The purposes of this study were to investigate whether age influences passive range of motion (PROM) in women and to compare obtained values with other available data. Ninety healthy Caucasian women from 18 to 59 years of age had the PROM of their ankle, knee, hip, shoulder, elbow, and wrist measured by using a standard goniometer. Data were analyzed by using descriptive statistics (mean/SD) and linear regression (to analyze the effect of age on ROM). Age did not significantly influence PROM for the majority of movements tested. For 11 of the tested movements (knee flexion, hip flexion, hip external rotation, glenohumeral and shoulder complex flexion, glenohumeral and shoulder complex external rotation, shoulder complex abduction, shoulder complex extension, and elbow extension), increasing age was associated with a statistically significant decrease in PROM, whereas for ankle dorsiflexion, ankle plantarflexion, ankle inversion, and hip abduction, increasing age was associated with an increase in PROM. The change in PROM associated with age was typically small and ranged from -0.420 to 0.207 degrees per year. The difference in mean PROM between this study and published normative values ranged from -16.6 to +25.9 degrees. For women aged 18 to 59, PROM of the extremities is relatively constant, suggesting that a single table of reference values for adult females is an appropriate approximation for clinical practice except for glenohumeral and shoulder complex external rotation, which were found to clinically significantly decrease with age.
Article
Full-text available
Abnormal joint mobility is an important factor in movement dysfunction and physical disability. Because the decision to treat impaired joint mobility in an older individual may be influenced by assumptions concerning normal range of motion (ROM) at older ages, it is important to establish population-based normative values for hip and knee ROM by age, race, and sex. This study used data from the first National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES 1), which involved a national probability sample of persons drawn from the civilian noninstitutionalized population of the United States. Goniometric measurements of hip and knee active range of motion (AROM) were obtained from a subset of the sample consisting of 1,892 subjects. This analysis was limited to the 1,313 white and 370 black subjects. Univariate statistics, weighted by the probability of selection into the sample, were calculated for 12 sex-race-age-group-specific categories. These normal AROM values for the hip and knee calculated from this population based sample were found to differ from estimates found in textbooks by as much as 18 degrees. With one exception, normal values for all motions were lower in the oldest age group than in the youngest age group. The differences in mean AROM were generally small, ranging from 3 to 5 degrees. Only in the case of hip extension did the difference in mean AROM between the youngest and the oldest age groups constitute a decline of more than 20% of the arc of motion. With the possible exception of hip extension, this study supports the conclusion that, at least to age 74 years, any substantial loss of joint mobility should be viewed as abnormal and not attributable to aging and therefore should be treated much as it would be in a younger individual.
Article
Abstract There is a paucity of data describing the lofted instep kick and little information on the kinematic differences between male and female footballers. This study provides a preliminary investigation into the differences in motion patterns between the sexes. A four-camera motion analysis system videoed 13 amateur footballers (7 female and 6 male) attempting a standardised task that represented a lofted instep kick of approximately 35 m. Footballers performed 20 kicks, with the three trials categorised closest to the standardised distance retained for statistical analysis. Three-dimensional motion patterns for kicks of 35 m illustrated that female footballers produced greater fluctuation in movement patterns for pelvic, hip joint and thoracolumbar spine motion in the frontal plane; thorax and hip joint transverse rotation; and ankle dorsiflexion/plantarflexion motion. Peak hip extension (P = 0.018), impact hip abduction (P = 0.032), impact ankle plantar flexion (P = 0.030) and resultant ball velocity (P = 0.004) differed significantly between sexes. Principle component analysis highlighted associations between kinematic variables related to ball velocity and sex including a reduced hip abduction and increased internal rotation approaching impact, and greater peak knee flexion, respectively. In summary, increased variation in direction of segment motion, increased backswing and formation of a tension arc by females compared to males, may be related to anthropometric, strength and muscle activation differences. Specifically, this exploratory study indicates future research would benefit from exploring trunk, pelvis and hip kinematics and kinetics, and whether training the trunk, pelvis and hip musculature assists female footballers.
Article
Abnormal range of motion (ROM) is a common sign of pathology in the pediatric hip, yet there are little data in the literature defining what the normal hip ROM is in children. The purpose of this study was to establish normative values for hip ROM in children of varying ages. We performed an Institutional Review Board approved, prospective study of otherwise healthy patients receiving fracture care at our institution. Inclusion criteria were boys and girls aged 2 to 17, who were being treated for an isolated upper extremity injury and who had no underlying musculoskeletal condition, history of lower extremity injury, or other systemic diagnosis. All patients were evaluated with a standard measurement technique using the same double-long-armed goniometer. Supine abduction, adduction, and hip flexion were measured with care taken to stabilize the pelvis. Internal and external rotation in flexion were assessed with both the hip and knee flexed to 90 degrees. In the prone position, hip extension was recorded as was internal and external rotation in extension. Left and right measurements were averaged to produce a single data point for each index. On the basis of a power analysis (to detect a minimal detectable difference of 6 degrees), 2 separate cohorts of 23 patients were randomly selected for the assessment of intraobserver and interobserver reliability. We measured 504 hips in 252 pediatric patients, including 163 boys and 89 girls. We found a decreasing trend in ROM for almost all indices with advancing age, although this decline was less apparent among girls. Intraobserver reliability demonstrated excellent agreement (intra class correlation coefficient>0.81) for all indices. Interobserver assessments revealed excellent agreement for abduction, external rotation in flexion, internal rotation in extension, and external rotation in extension. Substantial agreement (intra class correlation coefficient, 0.61 to 0.8) was found for adduction, flexion, extension, and internal rotation in flexion. Normative values for hip ROM in children of varying ages have been established with acceptable intraobserver and interobserver reliability. Level II (Diagnostic).
Article
The Star Excursion Balance Test (SEBT) is composed of 8 reaching directions that are potentially measuring the same functional component, leading to the suggestion that the number of reach directions could be reduced without compromising the assessment of dynamic postural control. To determine whether the relationship of stance-leg angular displacement on normalized reach distance is a source of dynamic-postural-control measurement redundancy. Single-session within-subjects design. Athletic training research laboratory. 10 women and 10 men. None. Normalized reach distance and angular displacement at the knee and hip. Stepwise regression revealed that hip flexion and knee flexion, separately and in combination, accounted for 62% to 95% of the variance in reach distances. Similarity in lower extremity function could account for the previously observed measurement redundancy in the SEBT.
Article
In an easily practicable method of measuring the motion range in the ankle under load, the patient is asked to put his foot on a 30-cm-high stool and then lean forward as much as possible without lifting his heel from the supporting stool. In this position the knee is flexed and the greater part of the body weight is on the examined foot. Dorsal extension is then measured with a protractor as the angle between the support line of the foot and the long axis of the leg. The loaded plantar flexion is measured in the same position but with the heel raised as much as possible. In a study of 317 healthy ankles, this method was found to give greater and more reproducible values than measuring on unloaded ankles in sitting or supine positions. Measurements of the loaded dorsal extension were also made on radiographs of 66 healthy ankles. The mean value was 32.5 degrees; the mean talar forward tilt was 5.0 degrees. In normal daily life, at least 10 degrees are required; for performing athletics and sports activities, a loaded dorsal extension range of 20 degrees-30 degrees is necessary.