Motor control strategies during double leg squat following anterior cruciate ligament rupture and reconstruction: an observational study
Motor control strategies during double leg squat following anterior cruciate ligament rupture and reconstruction: an observational study
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/1743-0003-11-19
复制
发表时间：
2014-02-28
影响因子：
5.1
通讯作者：
van Deursen, Robert W. M.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Roos, Paulien E.;Button, Kate;van Deursen, Robert W. M.
背景：前交叉韧带（ACL）损伤的个体经常表现出损伤腿和非损伤腿之间的不对称性。更好地了解潜在的运动控制可能有助于改善康复。双腿深蹲练习允许补偿策略。因此，本研究探讨了运动控制策略，在双腿蹲，目的是调查，如果个人与ACL断裂（ACLD），ACL重建（ACLR）和健康对照组（CONT）使用不同的strategies.Methods：20 ACLD和21 ACLR进行了比较，21 CONT科目。参与者进行了8个连续的双腿深蹲到他们的最大深度，同时收集运动学和动力学数据。结果：与CONT相比，ACLR和ACLD的下蹲深度显著降低（p < 0.05; 106 +/-17度; 105 +/-21度; 113 +/-21度）。在ACLR和ACLD中，与仅在受伤腿中的CONT相比，峰值膝伸肌力矩（M-kn（mx））显著降低（p < 0.05; 0.045 +/- 0.015; 0.046 +/- 0.016; 0.059 +/- 0.022体重）。高度）。在CONT中，支撑力矩对称性（SYMMsup）和膝关节支撑力矩%（SYM%sup（kn））之间无显著相关性（R-2 = -0.07）。数据分布平均值显示良好的对称性。当排除两名未恢复的参与者时，ACLR显示SYMMsup和SYM%sup（kn）之间存在显著相关性（R-2 = 0.561）。ACLR采用两种策略控制膝关节力矩大小：1）将支撑力矩转移到非受伤腿; 2）将支撑力矩从膝关节转移到受伤腿的踝关节和/或髋关节。它们以不同的比例组合，但对膝关节力矩的影响相同。ACLD显示SYMMsup与SYM%sup（kn）之间无显著相关性（R-2 = 0.015）。数据分布平均值表明对称性降低。因此，ACLD使用的回避策略：减少蹲下的深度，随后在受伤的腿和膝盖contribution.Conclusions的支持时刻：ACLD和ACLR个人使用不同的蹲下的策略相比，控制，ACLR使用控制和ACLD使用回避行为膝关节负荷。这对康复有重大影响，因为这些动力学策略不能被观察到，但会导致受伤的腿不能按预期进行锻炼。
Background: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injured individuals often show asymmetries between the injured and non-injured leg. A better understanding of the underlying motor control could help to improve rehabilitation. Double leg squat exercises allow for compensation strategies. This study therefore investigated motor control strategies during a double leg squat with the aim to investigate if individuals with ACL rupture (ACLD), ACL reconstruction (ACLR) and healthy control subjects (CONT) used different strategies.Methods: 20 ACLD and 21 ACLR were compared to 21 CONT subjects. Participants performed eight continuous double leg squats to their maximum depth, while kinematic and kinetic data were collected. Outcome measures were calculated to quantify the behavior of the injured and non- injured legs and the asymmetry between these legs.Results: Squat depth was significantly reduced in ACLR and ACLD compared to CONT (p < 0.05; 106 +/- 17 degrees; 105 +/- 21 degrees; 113 +/- 21 degrees). Peak knee extensor moments (M-kn(mx)) were significantly reduced in ACLR and ACLD compared to CONT in the injured leg only (p < 0.05; 0.045 +/- 0.015; 0.046 +/- 0.016; 0.059 +/- 0.022 body weight. height respectively). There was no significant correlation between symmetry of the support moment (SYMMsup) and of the % support moment by the knee (SYM%sup(kn)) in CONT (R-2 = -0.07). Data distribution average indicated good symmetry. ACLR showed a significant correlation between SYMMsup and SYM%sup(kn) (R-2 = 0.561) when two participants who did not recover as well were excluded. ACLR controlled knee moment magnitude using two strategies; 1) transfer of support moment to non-injured leg; 2) transfer of support moment from knee to ankle and/or hip of injured leg. These were combined in different proportions, but with the same effect on the knee moment. ACLD showed no significant correlation between SYMMsup and SYM%sup(kn) (R-2 = 0.015). Data distribution average indicated reduced symmetry. ACLD therefore used an avoidance strategy: reducing squat depth and subsequently the support moment in the injured leg and the knee contribution.Conclusions: ACLD and ACLR individuals used different squatting strategies compared to controls, with ACLR using controlled and ACLD using avoidance behavior regarding knee loading. This has major implications for rehabilitation as these kinetic strategies cannot be observed, but result in the injured leg not being exercised as intended.