knee proprioception comparison in non injured futsalista athletes and patellofemoral subjects
Poster Presentation
Paper ID : 1096-12THCONG
Oral / Poster Presentation File: 1096.jpg
Authors
1physical education and sport sciences department, faculty of psychology and educational sciences, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran
2physical education and sport sciences department, faculty of psychology and educational sciences, Shiraz University
Abstract
Proprioception, or joint position sense, probably plays an important role in joint function. A number of studies have shown that proper joint position sense can decrease the risk of injuries in sports. It is not very clear how patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS) can affect athletes joint position sense (JPS). Regarding the importance of proper joint position sense for movement performance and injury prevention in athletes, the aim of this study was to evaluate knee JPS in athletes with PFPS and compare it with asymptomatic individuals under non-weight bearing (sitting) conditions.
The study design was comparative in which 15 patients and 15 healthy athletes participated. JPS was evaluated by active and passive replication of knee angles for 30, 45 and 60 of knee flexion target angle while visual cues were eliminated. Each test was repeated three times. By subtracting the test angle from the replicated angle, the absolute error was calculated as a dependent variable. T-statistical test was used to compare data between two groups and p- value of 0.05 was considered as the level of statistical significance.
No significant difference (P˃0.05) in active (A) and passive (P) knee JPS was found between two groups for three (30°, p-value (A =0.79, P=0.68), 45°, p-value (A=0.12, P=0.54) and 60°, p-value (A=0.74, P=0.71)) target angles.
According to results, both groups had the same JPS ability, it seems PFPS does not affect the knee JPS at least in athlete cases. It would be possible that deficiency of JPS compensated for the physical activity or on the other hand, maybe pain intensity was not high enough to interfere with JPS accuracy. According to our results, PFPS doesn’t reduce IPS but further investigation is needed to disclose if other factors such as skill level, intensity of pain or joint pathology are effective on JPS accuracy or not.
The study design was comparative in which 15 patients and 15 healthy athletes participated. JPS was evaluated by active and passive replication of knee angles for 30, 45 and 60 of knee flexion target angle while visual cues were eliminated. Each test was repeated three times. By subtracting the test angle from the replicated angle, the absolute error was calculated as a dependent variable. T-statistical test was used to compare data between two groups and p- value of 0.05 was considered as the level of statistical significance.
No significant difference (P˃0.05) in active (A) and passive (P) knee JPS was found between two groups for three (30°, p-value (A =0.79, P=0.68), 45°, p-value (A=0.12, P=0.54) and 60°, p-value (A=0.74, P=0.71)) target angles.
According to results, both groups had the same JPS ability, it seems PFPS does not affect the knee JPS at least in athlete cases. It would be possible that deficiency of JPS compensated for the physical activity or on the other hand, maybe pain intensity was not high enough to interfere with JPS accuracy. According to our results, PFPS doesn’t reduce IPS but further investigation is needed to disclose if other factors such as skill level, intensity of pain or joint pathology are effective on JPS accuracy or not.
Keywords
Subjects