STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional case-control design. BACKGROUND: Although the etiology of patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS) is not completely understood, there is some evidence to suggest that hip position during weight-bearing activities contributes to the disorder. OBJECTIVE: To compare the knee and hip motions (and their coordination) during stair stepping in female athletes with and without PFPS. METHODS: Two groups of female recreational athletes, 1 group with PFPS (n = 10) and a control group without PFPS (n = 10), were tested. All participants ascended and descended stairs (condition) at 2 speeds (self-selected comfortable and taxing [defined as 20% faster than the comfortable speed]), while the knee and hip angles were measured with a magnetic-based kinematic data acquisition system. Angle-angle diagrams were used to examine the relationship between flexion/extension of the knee and flexion/extension, adduction/abduction, and internal/external rotation of the hip. The angle of the knee and the 3 angles of the hip at foot contact on the third step were compared between groups by means of 3-way analyses of variance (ANOVA), with repeated measures on speed and condition. RESULTS: Group-by-speed interaction for knee angle was significant, with knee flexion being greater for the PFPS group for stair ascent and descent at a comfortable speed. Both the angle-angle diagrams and ANOVA demonstrated greater adduction and internal rotation of the hip in the individuals with PFPS compared to control participants during stair descent. CONCLUSION: Compared to control participants, females with PFPS descend stairs with the knee in a more flexed position and have the hip in a more adducted and internally rotated position at foot contact during stair stepping at a comfortable speed.

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2010;40(10):625-632, Epub 1 September 2010. doi:10.2519/jospt.2010.3185

KEY WORDS: hip, knee, patella

STUDY DESIGN: Single-group, repeated-measures study. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the test-retest reliability, construct validity, and responsiveness of the Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS) on inpatients attending an orthopaedic rehabilitation ward. BACKGROUND: The LEFS has acceptable validity on outpatients in assessing functional mobility, but it has not been tested for use on an inpatient orthopaedic ward. METHODS AND MEASURES: Inpatients in an orthopaedic ward (n = 142) completed the 20-item, self-report LEFS on admission, 7 to 10 days after admission, and on discharge. To test reliability, 24 patients had the LEFS repeated 1 day after the admission test, and the intraclass correlation (ICC) and the standard error of measurement (SEM) were calculated. Change scores of the LEFS were evaluated against patients’ and therapists’ rating of improvement, and change scores of comparison measures that included pain, functional performance, and the composite index created from scores of these comparison measures. The standardized response mean (SRM) of the LEFS was also computed. RESULTS: The ICC of the LEFS was 0.88, and the SEM was 4 LEFS points (LEFS score range, 0-80). The change in LEFS correlated with changes of comparison measures in the same direction of improvement. Patients rated as improved by both themselves and their therapists had significantly larger change in LEFS scores than subjects rated as no change. The SRM of the LEFS from admission to discharge was 1.76 on patients rated as improved. CONCLUSION: The LEFS is reliable and valid toassess group and individual change, and has large responsiveness. The LEFS and the comparison measures likely assess different constructs.

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2009;39(6):468-477, Epub 2 February 2009. doi:10.2519/jospt.2009.2971

KEY WORDS: inpatients, LEFS, orthopaedic, outcome measure

Chronic compartment syndrome (CCS) is a recognized cause of recurrent leg pain in the exercising patient. Decreased muscle function has been implied in this condition. This study compared the ankle dorsiflexion torque of 10 CCS patients with that of 18 control subjects during 20 repeated, maximal, isokinetic contractions at 60°/sec. Peak torque, relative peak torque, and endurance data were collected. Results showed significantly lower peak torque and relative peak torque in the CCS group (p ≤ 0.05), supporting the implication of muscle weakness in CCS. Paradoxically, endurance was significantly higher in the CCS group (p ≤ 0.01), and there was a significant (p ≤ 0.01), negative correlation (r = -0.50) between peak torque and endurance. The relationship between the findings and CCS is discussed. Strengthening may be useful in very mild cases or in postfasciotomy patients.

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1993;18(5):586-589.

STUDY DESIGN: Single-group repeated-measures study. OBJECTIVE: To examine the test-retest reliability of the timed up and go (TUG) test and its validity for measuring change and predicting length of stay (LOS) on an inpatient orthopaedic rehabilitation ward. BACKGROUND: The TUG test is used to measure functional mobility of persons with musculoskeletal conditions but it has not been thoroughly tested for use in an inpatient orthopaedic rehabilitation ward. METHODS AND MEASURES: The TUG test was administered to 142 patients on admission to an orthopaedic rehabilitation ward 7 to 10 days after admission and on discharge. To test reliability, 24 subjects had these tests repeated 1 day after admission, and the intraclass correlation (ICC) and standard error of measurement (SEM) were calculated. Change scores of the TUG test were evaluated against change scores in pain and function, and the rating of improvement of the patient and therapist. The standardized response mean (SRM) was also calculated. A regression analysis was performed to determine whether the admission TUG test score could predict LOS. RESULTS: The ICC of the TUG test was 0.80 and the SEM was 10.2 seconds. The change in TUG test scores correlated with the changes in pain (r = 0.21, P<.01) and function (r = -0.23, P<.01), and resulted in an SRM of 0.89 for subjects rated as improved. The admission TUG test scores accounted for only 3.4% of the variance in inpatient LOS. CONCLUSION: The TUG test is reliable and valid to assess group change of inpatients on an orthopaedic rehabilitation ward but is not a good predictor of LOS. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognosis, level 1b.

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2008;38(7):410-417, published online 22 February 2008. doi:10.519/jospt.2008.2657

KEY WORDS:  joint replacement, length of stay, outcome measure, TUG test