WEIGHT BEARING KNEE JOINT STABILISATION STRATEGIES DIFFER BETWEEN YOUNGER, OLDER, AND OSTEOARTHRITIC POPULATIONS
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Summary Statement Using a weight-bearing force control task, age-related changes in muscle action were observed in osteoarthritic subjects, however, greater activation of rectus femoris and medial hamstring muscles in the OA group compared to control indicates greater cocontraction and varied stabilisation strategies. Introduction Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most debilitating condition among older adults. OA is thought to be mechanically driven by altering the stabilising integrity of the joint. The main contributor to knee joint stability is that of muscular contraction. In cases where the history of a traumatic knee joint injury is not a causal factor, a change in muscle function, resulting in reduced strength and force control in believed to induce OA development and progression. Since age is also a determining factor of OA, the purpose of this study was to investigate the muscle activation patterns of young healthy adults (YC), older healthy adults (OC), and adults with OA during a standing isometric force control task. Patients & Methods A force matching protocol was used to evaluate muscle activation patterns of 41 YC (23.1±1.9 years of age) 18 OC (59.7±5.14 years), and 19 OA (63.5±8.1 years). Subjects stood with their leg of interest fixed to a force platform and modulated ground reaction forces while exposing equal body weight to each leg. Surface electromyography (EMG) of 8 muscles that cross the knee joint, kinetics and kinematics were recorded while subjects generated 30% of their maximal force in 12 different directions, corresponding to various combinations of medial-lateral-anterior-posterior ground reaction forces. Processed EMG was normalised to previously recorded maximum voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) and ensemble averaged into group means for each loading direction. Muscle activation patterns were displayed in EMG polar plots and were quantified with symmetry analyses, mean activation levels (X EMG ), directions (Φ), and specificity indices (SI). Group differences were tested with independent T-tests at the p Results Muscle activation patterns were similar between groups (i.e. symmetry and Φ). However, X EMG of 7 muscles was significantly greater in both the OA and OC groups compared to YC. OA group also demonstrated significantly greater X EMG in the rectus femoris and tensor fascia lata as well as lower SI in semitendinosus hamstrings compared to OC. Discussion/Conclusion Our results indicate that regardless of loading direction, both OC and OA groups have greater levels of muscle co-contraction than YC. This is suggested to be an adaptive response to age-related changes in muscle strength and force control. Since individuals with OA have reduced muscle strength and force control compared to age-matched controls, our results suggest that the OA group9s greater, less specific activation of knee joint muscles relative to the OC is this “stiffening” response adapted by the OA group, however, to an extent that may expose the joint to detrimental loading conditions, contributing to the progression of OA. Further investigation regarding age-related neuromuscular changes and their influence on joint loading conditions and development of OA is warranted.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».