COMPARING QUANTIFICATION METHODOLOGIES FOR THE SINGLE LEG-HEEL RISE TEST IN PATIENTS FOLLOWING OPERATIVE AND NONOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT FOR ACHILLES TENDON RUPTURE
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The Single Leg Heel Rise (SLHR) is commonly used to determine the functional status of patients following Achilles Tendon Rupture (ATR). The number of repetitions per limb is often not sufficient to quantify performance deficits, whereas peak heel rise height and total work may be more sensitive. Multiple methods exist to quantify performance variables during the SLHR including linear position transducers, video motion capture and mobile video technologies; however, these methodologies have not been directly compared in their quantification of SLHR performance following operative or non-operative management of Achilles Tendon rupture. Patients were retrospectively identified that were between the ages of 18–65, who had a complete ATR that was treated within three weeks of injury with either operative or non-operative management. The SLHR was completed to exhaustion with maximal, unilateral heel rises on a 10oangle board. A linear position transducer (LPT; GymAware, ACT, AUS) was anchored to the posterior calcaneus during the test. One sagittal plane camera (Ninox 125, Noraxon, AZ, USA) recorded for both the motion analysis data, which was post-processed in MyoVideo (MoCap; Noraxon, AZ, USA) and the Calf Raise App (APP; Hebert-Losier, 2020). Between limb and group differences in all variables were compared with a two-way ANOVA. Pearson correlations and Bland Altman plots (limits of agreement (LOA)) were completed on work and limb symmetry index (LSI) values. Twenty four patients (n=12 operative and non-operatively treated; 42.6 ± 12.3 years, 174.9 ± 8.0 cm, 92 ± 18.8 kg, 17 male, 7 female) completed the SLHR. Total SLHR repetitions were lower in the non-operative group when measured with MoCap and the APP (p<0.05) but not the LPT. Peak heel rise height was reduced on the affected limb regardless of group across all three methods (p<0.05). Total heel rise height over the test was greater in the operative group regardless of limb when measured with MoCap and APP (p<0.05) but not the LPT. While total work was reduced on the affected limb, and more so in the non-operative group, this did not reach the threshold for statistical significance. Strong, positive correlations were demonstrated between all devices for total work, with the highest between MoCap and the APP (r2= 0.997), followed by the LPT and APP (r2= 0.906) and MoCap and LPT (r2= 0.905; p<0.001 for all). Similarly strong correlations were demonstrated (r2= 0.781 – 0.990) across devices for work LSI. Agreement for LSI was acceptable between MoCap and App (−0.067 % (95%LOA −6.38–6.25%); However, limits of agreement were broader for total work across all devices, or between MoCap or APP and the LPT for LSI. The Calf Raise App represents a simple method for both patients and clinicians to quantify between-limb deficits following operative or non-operative management of ATR during the SLHR using readily available technology. While work and LSI values between video capture technologies agree, they are not interchangeable with those from LPTs due to wide limits of agreement despite strong correlations amongst all devices.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| 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 | 0,000 | 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) | 0,000 | 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 tête enseignante, 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 ».