Home > Journals > European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine > Past Issues > European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine 2012 December;48(4) > European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine 2012 December;48(4):569-75

CURRENT ISSUE
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

Publishing options
eTOC
To subscribe
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Reprints
Permissions
Share

 

ORIGINAL ARTICLES   Free accessfree

European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine 2012 December;48(4):569-75

Copyright © 2012 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Does choice of angular velocity affect pain level during isokinetic strength testing of knee osteoarthritis patients?

Almosnino S. 1, 2, Brandon S. C. E. 2, 3, Sled E. A. 4

1 School of Kinesiology and Health Studies, Queen’s University, Kingston, ON, Canada; 2 Department of Mechanical and Materials Engineering Queen’s University, Kingston, ON, Canada; 3 Human Mobility Research Centre, Syl and Molly Apps Medical Research Centre, Kingston General Hospital and Queen’s University Kingston, ON, Canada; 4 School of Rehabilitation Therapy, Queen’s University, Kingston, ON, Canada


PDF


BACKGROUND: Thigh musculature strength assessment in individuals with knee osteoarthritis is routinely performed in rehabilitative settings. A factor that may influence results is pain experienced during testing.
AIM: To assess whether pain experienced during isokinetic testing in individuals with knee osteoarthritis is dependent on the angular velocity prescribed.
DESIGN: Experimental, repeated measures.
SETTING: University laboratory.
POPULATION: Thirty-five individuals (19 women, 16 men) with tibiofemoral osteoarthritis.
METHODS: Participants performed three randomized sets of five maximal concentric extension-flexion repetitions at 60°/s, 90°/s and 120°/s. Pain intensity was measured immediately after the completion of each set. Strength outcomes for each set were the average peak moment.
RESULTS: Across gender, pain level was not significantly affected by testing velocity (P=0.18, ηp2 =0.05). There was a trend of women reporting more pain than men across all testing velocities, however this comparison did not reach statistical significance (P=0.18, ηp2=0.05). There was a significant main effect of testing velocity on strength, with the highest level attained at 60°/s. However, no difference in strength was noted when testing was performed at 90°/s or 120°/s.
CONCLUSION: A large variation in pain scores within and across conditions and gender was noted, suggesting that at the current stage: 1) isokinetic angular velocity prescription be performed on an individual patient basis; and 2) improvements in the manner pain is recorded are needed in order to reduce the variations in pain scores.
CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT: Individual prescription of angular velocity may be necessary for optimal strength output and reduction of pain during effort exertion in this patient population.

top of page