|Title of the paper:
|Comparative Analysis of Postural Stability During Single-Leg Stance in Subjects With and Without Patellofemoral Pain
|Gamze Arin-Bal, Guney-Deniz, H.
|Hacettepe University, Faculty of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation
|Department of Musculoskeletal Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation
Patellofemoral pain is a musculoskeletal disorder frequently observed in young athletes and is associated with functional impairments. Subjects with PFP exhibit deficits in postural control measures compared to healthy subjects, and there is a need to evaluate these measures, particularly in different stance tasks such as single-leg stance.
A total of 34 legs were evaluated for the study, comprising 12 subjects with PFP (3 male, 9 female; 16 legs with PFP) and 9 healthy subjects (3 male, 6 female; 18 legs). After collecting demographic data such as age and body mass index (BMI) from each subject, pain at rest and during activity was assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS), and the Kujala Patellofemoral Score (KPS) was administered to assess functional status to the subjects with PFP. K-Plates from Kinvent (Kinvent Inc., Montpellier, France) were utilized to evaluate postural stability. Each subject performed a single leg-stance for 50 seconds with three repetitions, and the mean scores were analyzed for the differences. Measures collected included ellipse area in mm2, anteroposterior (AP) and mediolateral (ML) amplitudes in mm, and AP, ML, and center of pressure (CoP) path lengths and velocity measures in mm and mm/s, respectively.
The mean age was 24±4.15 years, and BMI was 21.23±2.47 kg/cm2 in the PFP group, while the mean age was 24.83±3.73 years, and BMI was 22.75±2.85 kg/cm2 in the healthy group. Demographic characteristics of the two groups were similar (p>0,05). Mean pain scores were 2.18±1.88 at rest and 4.61±2.22 during activity. The mean KPS score was 79.69±7.81 in subjects with PFP. The AP, ML, and CoP path measures were higher, and ML and CoP velocity measures were lower in PFP group compared to healthy controls (p<0,05). There were no differences in ellipse area, AP and ML amplitudes, and AP mean velocity measures between the two groups (p>0,05).
The study results indicate that subjects with PFP, even their functional status is good, exhibit increased postural stability values compared to healthy controls, providing insights into the postural stability differences between the two groups. Subjects with PFP may be at risk due to altered postural stability during various physical activities and sports (i.e., running). Given that postural control is considered a risk factor for developing lower extremity injuries, deviations in postural stability should be addressed to improve health. Single-leg stance assessment can be considered for evaluating postural stability in clinics to better understand the conditions of the subjects with PFP and provide better rehabilitation approaches in case injury originated from poor postural stability.