Reliability of the Frontal Plane Knee Alignment Measurement Based on a Remote Protocol

Authors

  • Karina Rodrigues Mauro School of Physical Education, University of Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil
  • Laura de Menezes Cantusio School of Physical Education, University of Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil
  • Karina Guimarães de Brito Menezes School of Physical Education, University of Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil
  • Karine Jacon Sarro School of Physical Education, University of Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5195/ijt.2022.6506

Keywords:

Dynamic knee valgus, Kinematics, Movement evaluation, Functional test

Abstract

Introduction: The analysis of movement quality is important for better exercise prescription. This study tested the reproducibility of a protocol for remote assessment of dynamic knee alignment using images taken by patients. Methods: Thirteen women filmed themselves performing single-leg squats on two days at a 15-day interval. Three raters measured the knee frontal plane projection angle using the resultant images. Results: Two participants (15.4%) were excluded for not performing the protocol correctly. The intraclass correlation coefficient was between 0.880 and 0.999 for the intra-rater comparison, and between 0.817 and 0.987 for the inter-rater comparison. Discussion: The success of the protocol in 84.6% of participants and the excellent reproducibility suggest that the methodology of analyzing patient-captured cell phone images might be a plausible alternative for remote evaluation of dynamic knee alignment.

  

References

Barrios, J.A., Heitkamp, C. A., Smith, B. P., Sturgeon, M. M., Suckow, D. W., & Sutton, C. R. (2016). Three-dimensional hip and knee kinematics during walking, running and single-limb drop landing in females with and without genu-valgum. Clinical Biomechanics (Bristol, Avon), 31, 7-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2015.10.008

Brechter, J. H., Powers, C. M., Terk, M. R., Ward, S. R., & Lee, T. Q. (2003). Quantification of patellofemoral joint contact area using magnetic resonance imaging. Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 21(9), 955–959. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0730-725X(03)00198-X

Charlebois, R., Cote, N., O’Rourke, M., Verville, D., McComas, J., Fruhwirth, J., & Bernard, M. B. L. (2000). Intra- and interrater reliability of the video conference-based goniometer for active knee flexion and extension in healthy subjects. Journal of Rehabilitation Outcomes Measures, 4, 23–33.

Crowell, K. R. Nokes, R. D, & Crosby, N. L., (2021). Weak hip strength increases dynamic knee valgus in single-leg tasks of collegiate female athletes, Journal of Sports Rehabilitation, 30(8), 1220-1223. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsr.2021-0043

Gwynne, C. R., & Curran, S. A. (2014). Quantifying frontal plane knee motion during single limb squats: Reliability and validity of 2-dimensional measures. International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy, 9(7), 898 – 906.

Hewett, T. E., Myer, G. D., Ford, K. R., Heidt, R. S., Colosimo, A. J., McLean, S. G., Van Den Bogert, A. J., Paterno, M. V., & Succop, P. (2005). Biomechanical measures of neuromuscular control and valgus loading of the knee predict anterior cruciate ligament injury risk in female athletes: A prospective study. The American Journal of Sports Medicine, 33(4), 492–501. https://doi.org/10.1177

/0363546504269591

Jiang, S., Xiang, J., Gao, X., Guo, K., & Liu, B. (2018). The comparison of telerehabilitation and face-to-face rehabilitation after total knee arthroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, 24(4), 257–262. https://doi.org/10.1177/1357633X16686748

Kairy, D., Lehoux, P., Vincent, C., & Visintin, M. (2009). A systematic review of clinical outcomes, clinical process, healthcare utilization and costs associated with telerehabilitation. Disability and Rehabilitation, 31(6), 427–447. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638280802062553

Mani, S., Sharma, S., Omar, B., Paungmali, A., & Joseph, L. (2017). Validity and reliability of Internet-based physiotherapy assessment for musculoskeletal disorders: A systematic review. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, 23(3), 379–391. https://doi.org/10.1177/1357633X16642369

McGill, R., Tukey, J. W., & Larsen, W. A. (1978). Variations of box plots. American Statistician, 32(1), 12–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/00031305.1978.10479236

McLean, S. G., Huang, X., & Van Den Bogert, A. J. (2005). Association between lower extremity posture at contact and peak knee valgus moment during sidestepping: Implications for ACL injury. Clinical Biomechanics (Bristol, Avon), 20(8), 863–870. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CLINBIOMECH.2005.05.007

Munro, A., Herrington, L., & Carolan, M. (2012). Reliability of 2-dimensional video assessment of frontal-plane dynamic knee valgus during common athletic screening tasks. Journal of Sport Rehabilitation, 21, 7–11.

https://doi.org/10.1123/jsr.21.1.7

Murray, T., Murray, G., & Murray, J. (2021). Remote musculoskeletal assessment framework: A guide for primary care. Cureus, 13(1), e12778. https://doi.org/10.7759/CUREUS.12778

Palacín-Marín, F., Esteban-Moreno, B., Olea, N., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Arroyo-Morales, M. (2013). Agreement between telerehabilitation and face-to-face clinical outcome assessments for low back pain in primary care. Spine, 38(11), 947–952. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e318281

Powers, C. M. (2003). The influence of altered lower-extremity kinematics on patellofemoral joint dysfunction: A theoretical perspective. The Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy, 33(11), 639–646. https://doi.org/10.2519/JOSPT.2003.33.11.639

Ressman, J., Grooten, W. J. A., & Rasmussen-Barr, E. (2021). Visual assessment of movement quality: A study on intra- and interrater reliability of a multi-segmental single leg squat test. BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation, 13(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/S13102-021-00289-X/TABLES/4

Russell, T. G., Jull, G. A., & Wootton, R. (2003). Can the Internet be used as a medium to evaluate knee angle? Manual Therapy, 8(4), 242–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1356-689X(03)00016-X

Simon, M., Parizek, C., Earl-Boehm, J. E., & Bazett-Jones, D. M. (2018). Quantitative and qualitative assessment of frontal plane knee motion in males and females: A reliability and validity study. The Knee, 25(6), 1057–1064. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.KNEE.2018.09.008

Tate, J., True, H., Dale, B., & Baker, C. (2015). Expert versus novice interrater and intrarater reliability of the frontal plane projection angle during a single-leg squat. International Journal of Athletic Therapy and Training, 20(4), 23–27. https://doi.org/10.1123/IJATT.2014-0116

Werner, D. M., Di Stasi, S., Lewis, C. L., & Barrios, J. A. (2019). Test-retest reliability and minimum detectable change for various frontal plane projection angles during dynamic tasks. Physical Therapy in Sport: Official Journal of the Association of Chartered Physiotherapists in Sports Medicine, 40, 169–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PTSP.2019.09.011

Downloads

Published

2022-12-13

How to Cite

Mauro, K. R., de Menezes Cantusio, L., Guimarães de Brito Menezes, K., & Jacon Sarro, K. (2022). Reliability of the Frontal Plane Knee Alignment Measurement Based on a Remote Protocol. International Journal of Telerehabilitation, 14(2). https://doi.org/10.5195/ijt.2022.6506

Issue

Vol. 14 No. 2 (2022)

Section

Clinical Research

License

Copyright (c) 2022 Karina Mauro, Laura de Menezes Cantusio, Karina Guimarães de Brito Menezes, Karine Jacon Sarro

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
  2. Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
  3. The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
    1. Attribution—other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
    with the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.
  4. The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  5. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a prepublication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
  6. Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
  7. The Author represents and warrants that:
    1. the Work is the Author’s original work;
    2. the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
    3. the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
    4. the Work has not previously been published;
    5. the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
    6. the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
  8. The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.

Revised 7/16/2018. Revision Description: Removed outdated link.