Quadriceps strength prediction equations in individuals with ligamentous injuries, meniscal injuries and/or osteoarthritis of the knee joint

摘要: The objective of this study was to investigate the accuracy eleven prediction equations and one table when estimating isoinertial knee extension leg press repetition maximum (1-RM) performance in subjects with injuries osteoarthritis. Study Design: A descriptive quantitative research undertaken utilizing a cross-sectional design. Background: Traumatic osteoarthritis are common musculoskeletal pathologies that can disrupt normal function joint. frequent sequela these is quadriceps femoris muscle weakness. Such weakness contribute disability diminished levels functional recreational activity. Therefore, safe accurate methods measuring maximal strength required identify quantify deficits. One option proposed literature use 1-RM which estimate from number repetitions completed sub-maximal loads. These have been investigated previously using healthy populations calf injuries. However, date, no known has their individuals joint pathologies. Method: Machine-weight seated exercises were study. Twenty 12 OA testing procedures for exercise. Nineteen 18 All attended venue on three occasions. At first visit familiarization session carried out. second third visits each subject randomly assigned perform either actual or predicted both exercises. Twelve different used results. estimates then compared assess level conformity between measures. Statistical including Bland Altman analyses, intraclass correlation coefficients, typical error total measurement analyses In addition, paired t-tests performed determine whether values significantly across control affected limbs there any significant differences predictive equation limbs. Finally, within 5% less determined equation. Results: When injury group exercise, Brown, Brzycki, Epley, Lander, Mayhew et al., Poliquin Wathen demonstrated greatest accuracy. two atypical identified excluded improved further. Following removal subjects, found (p > 0.05). Typical errors low more ranging 2.4-2.8% 2.4-3.5%, respectively. Overall, appeared be most method sample (affected limbs: bias 0.3 kg, 95% limits agreement (LOA) -5.8 6.4 as coefficient variation (COV) 2.4%, (total error) 2.4%; -1.3 LOA -9.0 6.3 COV 2.7%, 2.8%). No an COVs ranged 2.5-2.7% 2.4-2.9%, 0.9 -4.5 2.5%, 2.5%; -0.1 -6.0 5.9 2.4%). press, Adams, Berger, Lombardi O’Connor 2.8-3.2% 2.9-3.3%, Berger -0.4 -7.2 3.2%, 3.2%; 0.1 -6.6 6.7 3.1%, 3.0%) -0.6 LOA-6.8 5.7 2.9%, 3.0%; -0.2 -6.9 2.9%) sample. KLW, highest observed study, 5.8-6.0% 5.7-6.2%, KLW it possible produced by might not matched closely enough clinically acceptable some purposes. Conclusion: findings current suggested groups. contrast, group, while results group. higher clinical concluded single able accurately OA.