MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2255310855 · doi:10.1177/0363546515624677

Immediate Effects of a Brace on Gait Biomechanics for Predominant Lateral Knee Osteoarthritis and Valgus Malalignment After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

2016· article· en· W2255310855 on OpenAlexaff
Harvi F. Hart, Natalie J. Collins, David C. Ackland, S. Cowan, Michael A. Hunt, Kay M. Crossley

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Sports Medicine · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsValgusBraceMedicineSagittal planeOsteoarthritisGaitOrthodonticsCoronal planeBracingAnterior cruciate ligamentBiomechanicsAnterior cruciate ligament reconstructionGait analysisPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysical therapyLigamentAnkleAnatomyStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Lateral knee osteoarthritis is notably common after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). While valgus bracing has been investigated as an intervention for medial knee osteoarthritis (OA), little is known about the effectiveness of varus bracing for lateral knee OA after ACLR. PURPOSE: To determine the immediate effects of a varus unloader knee brace on gait biomechanics in people with lateral knee OA and valgus malalignment after ACLR. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: Nineteen participants who had undergone primary ACLR 5 to 20 years previously and had symptomatic and radiographic lateral knee OA as well as valgus malalignment were included. Three-dimensional gait analyses were conducted during walking under 3 test conditions: (1) no brace, (2) unadjusted brace (sagittal plane support with neutral frontal plane adjustment), and (3) adjusted brace (sagittal plane support with varus adjustment). Knee, pelvis, hip, and ankle kinematics and moments data were statistically analyzed using repeated-measures analysis of variance (α = 0.05). RESULTS: Compared with walking with no brace, the adjusted brace significantly increased peak knee flexion angle (mean difference [95% CI]: 3.2° [1.3° to 5.0°]) and adduction angle (1.7° [0.8° to 2.6°]) and reduced peak internal rotation angle (-3.0° [-4.0° to -2.0°]). Significant increases in peak knee flexion moment (0.14 N·m/kg [0.06 to 0.20 N·m/kg]), adduction moment (0.10 N·m/kg [0.07 to 0.14 N·m/kg]), and external rotation moment (0.01 N·m/kg [0.00 to 0.02 N·m/kg]) were observed with the adjusted brace. The adjusted brace also reduced peak hip adduction angle (-1.29° [-2.12 to -0.47]) and increased peak hip adduction (0.17 N·m/kg [0.04 to 0.31 N·m/kg]) and external rotation moments (0.09 N·m/kg [0.03 to 0.14 N·m/kg]). There were no significant differences between the adjusted and unadjusted brace conditions, except for knee internal rotation angle, where the adjusted brace produced significantly greater reductions relative to the unadjusted brace (-1.46° [-1.98 to -0.95]). CONCLUSION: Irrespective of frontal plane adjustment, the varus unloader brace produced immediate modulations in sagittal, frontal, and transverse plane joint angles and moments in younger individuals with lateral knee OA and valgus malalignment after ACLR. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The varus unloader brace may have the potential to mitigate abnormal knee joint mechanics associated with the development and progression of lateral knee OA after ACLR.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.003
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.230 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of Sports MedicineSame topicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniquesFrench-language works237,207