Marys Medicine

Physioinfo.co.za

quadriceps inhibition due to pain. Resistance was and external rotators of the hip, and the abdominal given at the distal tibia, 10 cm proximal to the lateral musculature. Muscle strength testing of the hip was malleolus, and the average of 3 trials was recorded.
performed using a hand-held dynamometer in test Preintervention force results are presented in the positions described by Kendall.31 Subjectively, both Table. Patient A was subjectively assigned a manual patients demonstrated significant weakness of the muscle test grade of 3+/5, while patient B was ipsilateral gluteus medius (grade 3+/5 in both cases), assigned a manual muscle test grade of 4/5.
and gluteus maximus (grade 4⫺/5 and 3+/5 forpatients A and B, respectively). In addition, signifi- cant ipsilateral weakness of the hip lateral rotatorswas observed in patient A (grade 3+/5). The force Lower-extremity alignment was assessed qualitatively and quadriceps values recorded with the hand-held in a relaxed standing posture. Neither patient dem- dynamometer during these muscle tests are presented onstrated significant rearfoot varus/valgus or genu in the Table.
varus/valgus. There also was no observable squinting Tests to ascertain neuromuscular control of pelvic of the patellae, which is indicative of femoral antever- motion have been described in detail by Sahrmann50 sion. This was confirmed by performing Craig's test and Farrell.15 Four of these tests were performed and in prone.36 Limb length (as measured from the included: (1) evaluation of the patient moving from anterior superior iliac spine to the medial malleolus) double- to single-limb stance, noting signs of pelvic was assessed bilaterally in the supine position and was drop and observing the lateral translation of the found to be equal when measured to the nearest 0.5 pelvis; (2) maintenance of a static bridge position against a manual rotational displacement force ap-plied to the pelvis in the transverse plane; (3) evaluation of the patients' ability to prevent pelvictilting in the frontal plane during a single-hip abduc- Gait Observational gait analysis was performed as tion motion in a sidelying position; and (4) preven- the patients walked at a self-selected pace along a tion of pelvic motion in the transverse plane during 10-m walkway. Both patients demonstrated normal an abduction/external rotation movement of the hip sagittal plane motion of the ankle, knee, and hipjoints. Abnormalities were noted, however, in thefrontal and transverse planes. During stance phase onthe affected side, the following deviations were ob-served: (a) excessive hip adduction during weightacceptance, (b) excessive internal hip rotation inearly midstance, and (c) notable contralateral pelvicdrop during midstance. These deviations were evi-dent in both patients. Neither demonstrated excessiveor prolonged subtalar joint pronation or excessivetibial internal rotation during the stance phase ofgait.
Step-Down Task Patients also were evaluated dynami- cally during an activity that required greater demandson the lower-extremity muscles. The step-down taskinvolved observing each patient stepping down slowlyfrom a 20.4-cm-high (8-in) step during a 3-secondperiod. Both patients demonstrated significant hipadduction and slight internal rotation of the stancelimb and an appreciable contralateral pelvic drop. Inboth cases, this motion resulted in substantial valgusat the knee (Figure 1).
Muscle Strength Examination: Hip and Abdominal
Musculature
Based on the significant frontal and transverse plane deviations at the hip during the dynamicexamination, a decision was made to assess the FIGURE 1. Photograph of patient A demonstrating marker place-
strength of the hip and trunk muscles. These in- ment and experimental setup. Prior to the intervention, substantial cluded the gluteus maximus, gluteus medius, internal knee valgus was observed during this procedure.
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther • Volume 33 • Number 11 • November 2003 in hook lying. Spinal or pelvic motion during tests (3 and 4) was evaluated by palpating the anterior superior iliac spines (ASIS). Both patients demon- strated poor control of motion as demonstrated bysignificant observable and palpable translation of the pelvis during all of the above tests.
In addition to the physical examination, patient A Musculoskeletal Biomechanical Research Laboratoryat the University of Southern California. The purpose of this testing was to document lower-extremity kine-matics during the step-down maneuver and to pro- vide objective data for posttreatment comparison.
Hip Rotation Angle (degrees) Three-dimensional kinematics of the lower extrem- ity were obtained using methodology described in previous publications.51,52 Data were obtained whilepatient A performed a step-down maneuver from a 20.4-cm-high (8-in) step with the symptomatic side as the supporting limb (Figure 1). The patient was instructed to perform this maneuver slowly over thecourse of 3 seconds. Three trials of data were collected and averaged for analysis. Variables of interest were hip adduction, hip internal rotation,and contralateral pelvic drop. When averaged across the entire stance phase, patient A demonstrated 1.4°of hip internal rotation, 8.7° of hip adduction, and 3.9° of contralateral pelvic drop during the step-down test (Figure 2).
Hip Adduction Angle (degrees) Given the subjective and objective information obtained in the examination, it was our impressionthat neither patient demonstrated significant abnor- malities specific to the patellofemoral joint that couldaccount for subjective complaints of PFP. Both pa- tients, however, demonstrated significant weakness of the hip and abdominal musculature, and a reduced ability to control hip and pelvis motion during dynamic testing. We theorized that this poorneuromuscular control was responsible for the in- creased internal rotation/adduction of the hip ob- served during gait and the step-down maneuver, and that these femoral motions may have contributed to the PFP symptoms.45 Therefore, it was our hypothesis that exercises focused on addressing the documented muscular weaknesses and abnormal movement pat- terns would aid in pain resolution, improve func- tional status, and result in improved gait kinematics Pelvic Obliquity (degree) -5 during level walking and the step-down maneuver.
Foundations for Treatment
FIGURE 2. Kinematic plots demonstrating patient A's lower-
extremity motion (preintervention and postintervention) during the
Both patients were scheduled to attend physical step-down task. (A) Hip internal rotation. (B) Hip adduction. (C) therapy once or twice a week over a 3-month period.
Frontal plane pelvic motion of the contralateral pelvis.
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther • Volume 33 • Number 11 • November 2003

FIGURE 3. Non–weight-bearing exercises performed with the spine
maintained in a neutral position (weeks 0-6). (A) Alternate hip andknee flexion/extension motions. (B) Gluteus medius exercises involv-ing hip abduction/external rotation. (C) Progression of gluteusmedius exercise. Placing the uppermost knee in extension increasesthe lever arm. The hip should be held in less than 25° externalrotation and slight extension. (D) Gluteus maximus strengtheningwas facilitated by extending the hip with the knee held in greaterthan 90° of knee flexion. Anterior pelvic tilt palpated by thepatient's fingers on the anterior superior iliac spine indicates endrange active hip extension. (E) Hip abductor and external rotatorstrengthening was progressed by assuming a quadruped startingposition and performing an external rotation/abduction/extension motion of the lower extremity against gravity.
The patients were educated regarding their conditionand the intended treatment approach and realisticgoal setting was discussed.
Both patients were placed on an exercise program initially focused on controlling pelvic motion whileperforming active lower-extremity movement. Accord-ing to Nadler et al,41 it is important to establishsatisfactory lumbopelvic control to ensure that theproximal attachment site for the hip abductors andlateral rotators is stable. Such stability is thought to promote greater torque production by these muscles during exercise and minimize frontal-plane motion(ie, contralateral pelvic drop or spinal side flexion)during single-limb stance activities.
The hip muscles (particularly gluteus maximus and medius, hip abductors, and lateral rotators) wereprogressively strengthened first in the non–weight-bearing position, then in the weight-bearing position,using functional movement patterns. By focusing onthe maintenance of a stable pelvis while introducingactive hip motions, it was thought that proprioceptiveawareness also would be enhanced.15,50,58 Specific recommendations for muscle strength training are controversial and a variety of trainingprotocols have been established. It is generallyagreed, however, that an exercise load that causesfatigue after 10 to 15 repetitions for 2 to 3 sets,performed 3 times a week for 6 to 12 weeks, will leadto improved muscle strength.16,32,47 Based on these parameters, a progression criterion for the proposed exercise program was formulated.
When the patient could perform a specific exercise(or a 10-second isometric muscle contraction), for 2 sets of 15 repetitions, while maintaining a neutral spinal position, the exercise would be progressed byincreasing resistance. Both patients were given ahome exercise program that they were to performtwice daily. The home program paralleled the exer-cises given in the clinic, and each patient was deemedready to commence a new exercise at home when thepatient was able to correctly carry out the movementin the clinic with minimal verbal prompts.
As muscle strength and motor control improved, patients were progressed to complex coordinatedmotor patterns involving functional activities. At this time, they gradually reinstituted their previous in- J Orthop Sports Phys Ther • Volume 33 • Number 11 • November 2003 volvement in identified sport and social activities.
their ASIS ipsilateral to the side of lower-extremity Specific details concerning the various exercises em- motion. This was done to ascertain when pelvic ployed are discussed below.
rotation occurred. The patients were instructed tostop when movement was felt. Throughout the re- Non–Weight-Bearing Exercise (Weeks 0-6)
maining exercise progressions, the patients were con-tinually encouraged to maintain a static pelvic Prior to initiating the dynamic strengthening pro- position, with emphasis being placed on the patients gram of the hip musculature, the patients were self-monitoring their performance using tactile and taught to perform isometric contractions of the visual (mirror) feedback.
abdominals, gluteus medius, and gluteus maximus.
Performing the sidelying hip abduction exercise Abdominal strengthening exercises were performed with an extended knee initially increased the resis- in a hook-lying position as described by Taylor and tance of the previously described exercise (Figure O'Sullivan.58 A pressure cuff provided feedback of 3C). To isolate the gluteus medius and minimize the spinal position during the hook-lying exercise.
tensor fascia lata activity, the hip was maintained in a The cuff was placed between the lumbar spine and slightly extended position and externally rotated to the treatment table and inflated slightly. The patients less than 25°.43 Care was taken that the pelvis and were asked to maintain a stable pressure reading lumber spine remained stable throughout, ensuring (interpreted as minimal spinal motion), while per- isolation of the movement to the hip joint.
forming concurrent hip and knee flexion with alter- During this time, gluteus maximus exercises were nate legs (Figure 3A). Following principles of motor also given in a prone position over a pillow with the learning and skill acquisition,62 the pressure cuff knee held in at least 90° flexion (Figure 3D).50 feedback was provided at a reduced schedule and Patients were instructed to extend their slightly exter- gradually removed.
nally rotated hip until they felt approximation of the Isometric strengthening exercises for the gluteus ASIS on the pillow indicating an anterior tilt of the medius were performed in sidelying with the hips pelvis and lumbar spine extension. Throughout the and knees slightly flexed to minimize contribution range of motion, the patients were encouraged to from the tensor fascia lata (TFL). The TFL was focus on contraction of the gluteal muscles and judged to be contributing excessively when there was minimize activity of the hamstrings.
palpable activity in the muscle belly during the When patients were able to perform 2 sets of 15 exercise. Initially, patient B had great difficulty in repetitions of the above exercises, they were pro- minimizing TFL activity. She was, therefore, in- gressed to the quadruped position to perform hip structed to initiate her isometric gluteus medius external rotation/abduction, and hip extension (Fig- contractions in sidelying in front of a wall with her ure 3E). The demand was further increased by feet against it, so that by applying slight pressure to applying an external load using either Theraband the wall, active hip extension was encouraged, (Hygenic Corporation, Akron, OH) tied around the thereby reinforcing the gluteus medius contraction.
thighs, or a soft weight around the ankles. The Isometric gluteus maximus exercises were per- amount of weight was increased, using the guidelines formed as described by Sahrmann.50 This involved mentioned previously, in 1-lb (0.5-kg) increments.
lying in prone with 1 knee flexed to 90°. The patientswere instructed to contract the ipsilateral gluteal Weight-Bearing Exercise (Weeks 6-10)
muscle, while keeping the leg as relaxed as possible,thus minimizing hamstring muscle activity.
Once the patients were able to isolate the muscles When a stable spinal position could be maintained of interest during non–weight-bearing exercises, they while performing concurrent hip and knee flexion were progressed to weight-bearing exercises, which with alternate legs, and the progression criteria were included isometric and dynamic exercises in single- achieved for isometric gluteus maximus and medius limb stance. At this time the patients were introduced contractions, the patients were progressed to dynamic to the concept of neutral lower-extremity alignment exercises. This occurred at week 3 for patient A, and as described by McConnell.38 This involved alignment week 4 for patient B. The subsequent program of of the lower extremity such that the ASIS and knee dynamic hip-strengthening exercises for the lateral remained positioned over the second toe, with the rotators and the abductors of the hip predominately hip positioned in approximately 10° of external targeted the gluteus medius and maximus.
Gluteus medius exercises were done in sidelying, The patients were then instructed to stand next to with hips and knees flexed, performing hip abduc- a wall with the stance limb furthest from the wall.
tion with external rotation, while maintaining a They were asked to contract their transversus neutral spinal position by coactivating the transversus abdominus and gluteal muscles and then to assume a abdominus (Figure 3B). The patients were instructed single-limb stance position by flexing the contralateral to keep both feet together and lift the uppermost knee with the hip in a neutral position (Figure 4A).
knee as high as possible, while concurrently palpating Patients then performed isometric external rotation J Orthop Sports Phys Ther • Volume 33 • Number 11 • November 2003 of the stance leg while concurrently pushing the bent the trunk stability musculature and more springs leg into the wall. No movement of the pelvis was increasing the lower-extremity demand. Postural allowed, as confirmed by palpating the ASIS. In alignment and symmetrical strengthening were em- addition to challenging the abductors and external phasized during all exercises.55 To target the hip rotators of the unsupported leg, this exercise also abductors and trunk muscles, the patients stood on required the stance leg to maintain relative hip the Clinical Reformer, assuming a neutral lower- abduction despite the creation of an adduction extremity alignment, with 1 foot on the carriage.
torque by the body's center of mass during single- They were then instructed to perform a double hip abduction movement against light resistance while When the patients were able to perform 2 sets of maintaining a level pelvic position and neutral lower- fifteen 10-second repetitions of this exercise without extremity alignment (Figure 4C).
excessive motion of the pelvis or lower extremity, Using the stated progression criteria, the patients simultaneous upper-extremity exercises in single-limb were instructed to maintain a neutral lower-extremity stance were added. The exercise initially involved alignment while in single-limb stance, and to rotate ipsilateral upper-extremity activities and was then the upper body and trunk medially against resistance progressed to include the contralateral arm.
provided by Theraband (Figure 4D). This task pro- Evidence suggests that performing exercises in duced relative external rotation of the hip performed single-limb stance enhances gluteus medius activity,20 in a weight-bearing position.
and carrying a load in the arm contralateral to thestance limb leads to higher gluteus medius EMGactivity than if applied on the ipsilateral side.42 Functional Training (Weeks 10-14)
Patients were given a combination of fast upper-extremity activities, such as ball throws against a wall, To reinforce the concept of maintaining neutral alternate biceps curls, and rowing exercises, using lower-extremity alignment during functional tasks, the Theraband and pulley systems (Figure 4B) to provide patients were introduced to shallow-squatting activi- light resistance. Throughout these tasks, the patients ties. These were initially performed on the Clinical were instructed to maintain neutral lower-extremity Reformer, using a leg press motion (Figure 5A). The and pelvis alignment, palpating the ASIS of the benefit of utilizing the Clinical Reformer is that it stance limb using the free hand to monitor motion.
allows the subject to perform a weight-bearing activity At week 8, weight-bearing exercises for the abduc- with a load significantly less than body weight. This tors and external rotators of the hip were added.
will lessen joint reaction forces,7,37 especially if per- These were undertaken using the Clinical Reformer formed in knee flexion ranges less than 45°.57 The Pilates exercise equipment (Current Concepts Corp., exercise was then progressed by securing Theraband Sacramento, CA). This device consists of a horizon- around the distal aspect of the thighs to encourage tally moving carriage on which the patient can lie, activation of the external hip rotator/abductor mus- kneel, sit, or stand. Resistance is provided using culature throughout the range of hip flexion/ springs, with fewer springs increasing the demand on extension movement, and to provide proprioceptive FIGURE 4. Weight-bearing exercises (weeks 6-10). (A) Isometric hip abduction performed in weight bearing against a wall. (B)
Upper-extremity activities performed in a single-leg stance. (C) Bilateral standing hip abduction performed on the Clinical Reformer. The
patient's right leg is on a platform that moves to the right against spring resistance as she concurrently pushes both legs apart against
resistance, while maintaining a stable pelvic position. (D) Holding Theraband and rotating the body medially while maintaining a static
lower extremity produces relative external rotation at the hip.
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther • Volume 33 • Number 11 • November 2003 input. The spring resistance to the leg press maneu- ver was then gradually increased as symptoms andstrength gains dictated. When the patients couldconsistently demonstrate neutral lower-extremityalignment bilaterally throughout the semisquat activ-ity against the maximum spring resistance for 2 setsof 15 repetitions, they were progressed to a single-legsquat while maintaining the required neutral align-ment of the lower extremity (Figure 5B). When theprogression criterion was achieved, they then pro-gressed to the same motion in standing, first with adouble- and then a single-leg squat exercise. At this time, patient A was able to perform a double- and single-leg shallow squat to 40° symptom free, andpatient B was able to perform the double-leg shallowsquat to 40° symptom free, with mild discomfort (VASscore, 2/10) on the single-leg squat. Once the pa-tients were able to control a single-leg shallow squatin standing, they were given shallow lunging exercises(Figure 5C) from 0° to 45° knee flexion, usingTheraband, as described above, around the anteriorlunging thigh to promote activity of the hip abduc-tors and external rotators. Both patients also beganan aerobic conditioning exercise program using astair-climbing machine (ClimbMaster, Tetrix Fitness Equipment, Irvine, CA) and were instructed to main- tain the neutral lower-extremity alignment duringstair-climbing activities.
As the patients' pain resolved, interventions were targeted at improving their functional limitations toachieve their stated goals. At week 8, when patient Awas able to perform a shallow unilateral squat symp-tom free, and had no pain on stair climbing, shecommenced a progressive independent running/walking program. At week 9, when patient B was ableto perform a single-leg stance activity demonstratingneutral lower-extremity alignment of the stance limbduring contralateral lower- and upper-extremity activi-ties, she was encouraged to return to her walkingprogram.
Both patients were re-evaluated at week 14, 3 months after the commencement of the treatmentprogram. Patient A had undergone 14 visits, whilepatient B had undergone 18 visits.
The postintervention functional assessment scores increased from 76 to 85 and from 70 to 84 forpatients A and B, respectively.
FIGURE 5. Functional training (weeks 10-14). (A) Double-limb
squat performed on the Clinical Reformer. (B) Single-limb squat
Patient A reported no pain on walking or standing performed on the Clinical Reformer. (C) Lunges using Theraband during her 10-hour work shift and she no longer around the affected leg were used to encourage external rotation required her neoprene support. In addition, she was and abduction of the hip throughout the range of motion.
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther • Volume 33 • Number 11 • November 2003 now able to ascend and descend stairs without pain, had no feelings of weakness in her knee, and wasable to run 2 to 3 miles without discomfort. She Postintervention kinematic analysis of the step- occasionally experienced a tight feeling in the right down maneuver was performed on patient A, as knee during a full squat to reach into low cupboards described earlier. When compared to pretreatment at work, but this did not limit her activity.
values, improvements were noted in all motions Patient B described a significant reduction in her (Figure 6). Specifically, average hip internal rotation pain level. She was now able to ascend and descend a during stance improved from 1.4° of internal rotation flight of stairs symptom free with occasional discom- to 2.6° of external rotation; hip adduction was fort (2/10) only if she had been on her feet for a obser ved to decrease from 8.7° to 2.3°; and considerable time. She could walk for 45 minutes and contralateral pelvic drop was reduced from 3.9° to could perform house-cleaning chores that involved 1.1° (Figure 2). These objective measurements were squatting without difficulty or pain.
in agreement with the clinical observations notedearlier.
Patellofemoral Joint Examination
Re-evaluation of patient A's right patellofemoral joint demonstrated a negative apprehension test, but These case reports describe 2 patients with chief mild pain with patellar compression. She demon- complaints of PFP who responded favorably to a strated pain-free isometric resisted knee extension in strengthening program targeting the trunk, pelvis, non-weight-bearing; however, some tightness was ex- and hip musculature. Clinically relevant results were perienced at 20° of flexion. Patient B still demon- achieved without treatment strategies commonly em- strated a mild positive patellar compression test with ployed for the patellofemoral joint (ie, taping, vastus slight pain elicited and mild medial retinacular ten- medialis oblique strengthening, or stretching re- derness, but no pain on isometric resisted knee gimes). This suggests that the underlying cause of extension at 20° to 0°. She had full pain-free passive PFP in certain individuals may not be restricted tothe patellofemoral joint.
range of patella mobility.
Carson and James9,25 discussed the relevance of considering lower-extremity kinetic chain factors Muscle Strength Assessment
when evaluating and treating patients with a chiefcomplaint of knee pain. In addition, research by Re-evaluation of muscle strength using the hand- Beckman and Buchanan,1 Bullock-Saxton,8 and held dynamometer revealed significant improvements Jaramillo et al26 has demonstrated that weakness in both patients (Table). Patient A demonstrated proximal to the symptomatic area is often present strength gains in all muscle groups, most notably the with distal lower-extremity pathologies. This weakness, ipsilateral lateral rotators of the hip (317%), gluteus however, may be a precursor to the pathology or the result of subsequent motor control changes.27 Never- quadriceps (20%). Similarly, patient B demonstrated theless, by addressing the identified weak proximal strength gains in the gluteus maximus (110%), musculature in the patients in these cases, improve- gluteus medius (90%), the hip lateral rotator group ments were noted in both subjective and objective (15%), and quadriceps (10%).
It should be noted that during the exercise pro- gram, patients were continuously encouraged to monitor their performance of each motion. Suchtraining would facilitate motor learning of correct Gait Based on observational assessment, both pa- movement patterns, which may be distinct from tients demonstrated improved gait kinematics at the control of motion due to muscle strength alone.49 It hip in the frontal and transverse planes. In general, is, therefore, possible that the observed improve- there was less hip adduction during weight accep- ments in lower-extremity kinematics could have been tance, and a decrease in both hip internal rotation the result of a combination of muscle strength and and contralateral pelvic drop during midstance.
improved motor control of motion.
Step-Down Task Both patients demonstrated signifi- Both patients initially had a chief complaint of pain cant improvements during the step-down maneuver.
during stair ascent/descent and prolonged walking, Both had a reduction in adduction/internal rotation and demonstrated poor control of the lumbopelvic/ of the stance limb, less knee valgus, and a smoother hip region during these activities. McFadyen39 and motion into hip flexion. Neither patient experienced Soderberg56 concluded that the gluteus medius plays pain during, or after, the step-down maneuver.
an important role in hip and pelvic stability during J Orthop Sports Phys Ther • Volume 33 • Number 11 • November 2003 FIGURE 6. Computer-generated skeletal representation of patient A's lower-extremity kinematics. (A) Prior to intervention. (B) Postinterven-
tion. Reduced hip adduction and internal rotation of the hip can be observed in B.
stair descent, especially during the last 85% of the that this difference was clinically meaningful. For stance phase. In the preintervention test, patient A example, hip adduction would move the patella demonstrated excessive hip adduction during the last medially with respect to the ASIS, thereby increasing 80% of stance phase, suggesting inadequate strength the dynamic Q angle.45 Theoretically, any decrease in of the gluteus medius. As can be seen by the the hip adduction angle could result in a decrease in postintervention data (Figure 2B), hip adduction was the dynamic Q angle, thereby reducing the lateral reduced, especially during the last 80% of the step- force acting on the patella.45 down cycle, suggesting an improved control of this The gluteus maximus muscle has been shown to be a powerful external rotator of the hip,12 and the Although the measured changes in hip adduction function of its upper fibers have been found by Lyons during the step-down maneuver were relatively small et al34 to be similar to that of gluteus medius during (6.4° averaged across the stance phase), we believe gait and stair ascent. The substantial changes found J Orthop Sports Phys Ther • Volume 33 • Number 11 • November 2003 in preintervention and postintervention muscle 2. Bizzini M, Childs JD, Piva SR, Delitto A. Systematic strengths and kinematic data evaluating hip external review of the quality of randomized controlled trials for rotation (Figure 2A) indicate that the gluteus patellofemoral pain syndrome. J Orthop Sports PhysTher. 2003;33:4-20.
maximus may play an important role in the control 3. Bohannon RW, Andrews AW. Interrater reliability of of hip motion during gait and single-limb support hand-held dynamometry. Phys Ther. 1987;67:931-933.
4. Bohannon RW. Intertester reliability of hand-held The efficacy of quadriceps strengthening for PFP dynamometry: a concise summary of published re- has been described by several authors,11,29,30 and an search. Percept Mot Skills. 1999;88:899-902.
argument could be made that in undertaking the 5. Bohannon RW. Reference values for extremity muscle above exercise program, strength changes in the strength obtained by hand-held dynamometry fromadults aged 20 to 79 years. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. quadriceps group may have also contributed to the decrease in symptoms. While this may be the case, it 6. Brody LT, Thein JM. Nonoperative treatment for patel- should be noted that the strength gains in the quadriceps were significantly less than in the other muscle groups. Therefore, the resultant improvement 7. Buff HU, Jones LC, Hungerford DS. Experimental deter- in the eccentric step-down activity and associated pain mination of forces transmitted through the patello- are unlikely to be solely due to changes in quadriceps femoral joint. J Biomech. 1988;21:17-23.
8. Bullock-Saxton JE. Local sensation changes and altered hip muscle function following severe ankle sprain. Phys The patients studied in these 2 case reports were Ther. 1994;74:17-28; discussion 28-31.
selected based on their clinical presentation of sus- 9. Carson WG, Jr., James SL, Larson RL, Singer KM, pected proximal weakness, as suggested by observa- Winternitz WW. Patellofemoral disorders: physical and tional tests of gait and stair descent, and the lack of radiographic evaluation. Part I: Physical examination.
Clin Orthop. 1984;165-177.
localized patellofemoral joint static positional faults 10. Clark MA. Core stabilization training in rehabilitation.
and dynamic tracking problems. As always, careful In: Prentice WE, Voight ML, eds. Techniques in selection of the appropriate patient for a particular Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation. New York, NY: intervention is important in achieving successful out- comes. With this in mind, we feel that the described 11. Dehaven KE, Dolan WA, Mayer PJ. Chondromalacia patellae in athletes. Clinical presentation and conserva- treatment approach should be considered in the tive management. Am J Sports Med. 1979;7:5-11.
management of patients with PFP who present with 12. Delp SL, Hess WE, Hungerford DS, Jones LC. Variation similar clinical findings. This may be especially true of rotation moment arms with hip flexion. J Biomech. of those patients in whom a traditional course of treatment has not produced satisfactory results.
13. Downie WW, Leatham PA, Rhind VM, Wright V, Branco JA, Anderson JA. Studies with pain rating scales.
Ann Rheum Dis. 1978;37:378-381.
14. Fairbank HAT. Derangement of the knee in children and adolescents. Proc Roy Soc Med. 1937;30:427-432.
These case reports present 2 patients with PFP who 15. Farrell JP, Koury M, Caroline DT. Therapeutic exercise for back pain. In: Twomey LT, Taylor JR, eds. Physical demonstrated abnormal kinematics at the hip and Therapy of the Low Back. New York, NY: Churchill who responded favorably to an exercise program specifically targeting the hip, pelvis, and trunk muscu- 16. Franklin BA, Whaley MH, Howley ET. ACSM's Guide- lature. Further research is indicated to better define lines for Exercise Testing and Prescription. Philadelphia, the relationship between proximal hip muscle weak- PA: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2000.
17. Fitzgerald GK, McClure PW. Reliability of measure- ness and PFP, and to identify patients who will best ments obtained with four tests for patellofemoral align- respond to this treatment approach.
ment. Phys Ther. 1995;75:84-90; discussion 90-82.
18. Grelsamer RP, McConnell J. The Patella: A Team Approach. Gathersburg, MD: Aspen Publishers; 1998.
19. Henry JH. Conservative treatment of patellofemoral subluxation. Clin Sports Med. 1989;8:261-278.
The authors wish to thank Yu-Jen Chen, PT, MS, 20. Hodges PW, Richardson CA. Contraction of the ab- for assisting in the collection and processing of the dominal muscles associated with movement of the kinematic data, and the staff at USC Physical Therapy lower limb. Phys Ther. 1997;77:132-142; discussion142-134.
Associates, where these patients received their care.
21. Huberti HH, Hayes WC. Patellofemoral contact pres- sures. The influence of q-angle and tendofemoral con-tact. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1984;66:715-724.
22. Hvid I, Andersen LI. The quadriceps angle and its relation to femoral torsion. Acta Orthop Scand.
1982;53:577-579.
1. Beckman SM, Buchanan TS. Ankle inversion injury and 23. Inman VT. Functional aspects of the abductor muscles hypermobility: effect on hip and ankle muscle of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1947;53:577-579.
electromyography onset latency. Arch Phys Med 24. Insall J. Current Concepts Review: patellar pain. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1982;64:147-152.
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther • Volume 33 • Number 11 • November 2003 25. James SL, Bates BT, Osternig LR. Injuries to runners. Am 45. Powers CM. The influence of altered lower-extremity J Sports Med. 1978;6:40-50.
kinematics on patellofemoral joint dysfunction: a theo- 26. Jaramillo J, Worrell TW, Ingersoll CD. Hip isometric retical perspective. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. strength following knee surgery. J Orthop Sports Phys 46. Powers CM. Rehabilitation of patellofemoral joint disor- 27. Jenkins W, Bronner S, Mangine RE. Functional evalua- ders: a critical review. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. tion and treatment of the lower extremity. In: Brownstein B and Bronner S, eds. Functional Movement 47. Prentice WE. Impaired muscle performance: regaining in Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy: Evalua- muscular strength and endurance. In: Prentice WE, tion, Treatment, and Outcomes. New York, NY: Voight ML, eds. Techniques in Musculoskeletal Reha- Churchill Livingstone; 1997:191-229.
bilitation. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2001:59-72.
28. Kannus P, Aho H, Jarvinen M, Niittymaki S. Computer- ized recording of visits to an outpatient sports clinic.
48. Price DD, McGrath PA, Rafii A, Buckingham B. The Am J Sports Med. 1987;15:79-85.
validation of visual analogue scales as ratio scale 29. Kannus P, Natri A, Paakkala T, Jarvinen M. An outcome measures for chronic and experimental pain. Pain. study of chronic patellofemoral pain syndrome. Seven- year follow-up of patients in a randomized, controlled 49. Rose DJ. A Multilevel Approach to the Study of Motor trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1999;81:355-363.
Control and Learning. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon; 30. Kannus P, Niittymaki S. Which factors predict outcome in the nonoperative treatment of patellofemoral pain 50. Sahrmann S. Diagnosis and Treatment of Movement syndrome? A prospective follow-up study. Med Sci Impairment Syndromes. St. Louis, MO: Mosby; 2002.
Sports Exerc. 1994;26:289-296.
51. Salsich GB, Brechter JH, Farwell D, Powers CM. The 31. Kendall FP, McCreary EK, Provance P. Muscles, Posture, effects of patellar taping on knee kinetics, kinematics, and Pain. Baltimore, MD: Williams and Wilkins; 1993.
and vastus lateralis muscle activity during stair ambula- 32. Kisner C, Colby LA. Therapeutic Exercise: Foundations tion in individuals with patellofemoral pain. J Orthop and Techniques. Philadelphia, PA: F. A. Davis; 1996.
Sports Phys Ther. 2002;32:3-10.
33. Kujala UM, Jaakkola LH, Koskinen SK, Taimela S, 52. Salsich GB, Brechter JH, Powers CM. Lower extremity Hurme M, Nelimarkka O. Scoring of patellofemoral kinetics during stair ambulation in patients with and without patellofemoral pain. Clin Biomech (Bristol, 34. Lyons K, Perry J, Gronley JK, Barnes L, Antonelli D.
Timing and relative intensity of hip extensor and 53. Scott J, Huskisson EC. Graphic representation of pain.
abductor muscle action during level and stair ambula- tion. An EMG study. Phys Ther. 1983;63:1597-1605.
35. Macausland WR, Sargent AF. Recurrent dislocation of 54. Scuderi GR. Surgical treatment for patellar instability.
the patella. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1922;35:35-41.
Orthop Clin North Am. 1992;23:619-630.
36. Magee DJ. Orthopedic Physical Assessment. Philadel- 55. Siler B. The Pilates Body. New York, NY: Broadway; phia, PA: W. B. Saunders; 1997.
37. Maquet PGJ. Biomechanics of the Knee: With Applica- 56. Soderberg GL, Dostal WF. Electromyographic study of tion to the Pathogenesis and the Surgical Treatment of three parts of the gluteus medius muscle during func- Osteoarthritis. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag; 1984.
tional activities. Phys Ther. 1978;58:691-696.
38. McConnell J. Patellofemoral joint complications and 57. Steinkamp LA, Dillingham MF, Markel MD, Hill JA, considerations. In: Ellenbecker TS, ed. Knee Ligament Kaufman KR. Biomechanical considerations in patel- Rehabilitation. New York, NY: Churchill Livingstone; lofemoral joint rehabilitation. Am J Sports Med. 39. McFadyen BJ, Winter DA. An integrated biomechanical 58. Taylor JR, O'Sullivan P. Lumbar segmental instability: analysis of normal stair ascent and descent. J Biomech. pathology, diagnosis, and conservative management. In: Physical Therapy of the Low Back. New York, NY: 40. Messier SP, Davis SE, Curl WW, Lowery RB, Pack RJ.
Churchill Livingstone; 2000:201-247.
Etiologic factors associated with patellofemoral pain in 59. Thomee R, Augustsson J, Karlsson J. Patellofemoral pain runners. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1991;23:1008-1015.
syndrome: a review of current issues. Sports Med. 41. Nadler SF, Malanga GA, Bartoli LA, Feinberg JH, Prybicien M, Deprince M. Hip muscle imbalance and 60. Ward SR, Powers CM, Fredericson M, Guillet M, low back pain in athletes: influence of core strengthen- Shellock FG. The influence of medial femoral rotation ing. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2002;34:9-16.
42. Neumann DA, Cook TM. Effect of load and carrying on lateral patellar tilt during weight bearing and non position on the electromyographic activity of the weight bearing movements. Med Sci Sports Exerc. gluteus medius muscle during walking. Phys Ther. 61. Wilk KE, Davies GJ, Mangine RE, Malone TR. Patel- 43. Neumann DA, Soderberg GL, Cook TM. Comparison of lofemoral disorders: a classification system and clinical maximal isometric hip abductor muscle torques be- guidelines for nonoperative rehabilitation. J Orthop tween hip sides. Phys Ther. 1988;68:496-502.
Sports Phys Ther. 1998;28:307-322.
44. Philadelphia Panel evidence-based clinical practice 62. Winstein CJ. Knowledge of results and motor learning— guidelines on selected rehabilitation interventions for knee pain. Phys Ther. 2001;81:1675-1700.
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther • Volume 33 • Number 11 • November 2003 Functional assessment tool for patellofemoral joint disorders (from Kujala et al,33 with permission from (a) No difficulty (10) the Arthroscopy Association of North America).
(b) Slight difficulty (7)(c) Constant pain (2) Kujala Questionnaire for Patellofemoral Joint Pain
8. Prolonged sitting with the knees flexed (a) No difficulty (10) (b) Pain after exercise (8) (c) Constant pain (6) Duration of symptoms: (d) Pain forces to extend knees temporarily (4) For each question, circle the latest choice (letter) which corresponds to your knee symptoms.
(b) Slight and occasional (8) (b) Slight or periodical (3) (c) Interferes with sleep (6) (d) Occasionally severe (3) (e) Constant and severe (0) (a) Full support without pain (5) (c) Weight bearing impossible (0) (b) After severe exertion (8) (c) After daily activities (6) (a) Unlimited (5) (d) Every evening (4) (b) More than 2 km (3) 11. Abnormal painful kneecap (patellar) movements (a) No difficulty (10) (b) Occasionally in sports activities (6) (b) Slight pain when descending (8) (c) Occasionally in daily activities (4) (c) Pain both when descending and (d) At least 1 documented dislocation (2) (e) More than 2 dislocations (0) 12. Atrophy of thigh (a) No difficulty (5) (b) Repeated squatting painful (4) (c) Painful each time (3) 13. Flexion deficiency (d) Possible with partial weight bearing (2)(e) Unable (0) (a) No difficulty (10) (b) Pain after more than 2 km (8)(c) Slight pain from start (6)(d) Severe pain (3)(e) Unable (0) J Orthop Sports Phys Ther • Volume 33 • Number 11 • November 2003

Source: http://www.physioinfo.co.za/UserFiles/Case%20study.pdf