HighlightsImpaired movements and alignments may be associated with musculoskeletal conditions.Signs of impaired alignments and movements may be seen before there are symptoms.Treatment is based on using the findings of making the MSI diagnosis to correct the performance of daily activities.

Long distance runners with ITBS have weaker hip abduction strength in the affected leg compared with their unaffected leg and unaffected long-distance runners. Additionally, symptom improvement with a successful return to the preinjury training program parallels improvement in hip abductor strength.

The DM group subjects appeared to pull their legs forward using hip flexor muscles (hip strategy) rather than pushing the legs forward using plantar-flexor muscles (ankle strategy), as seen in the NODM group subjects. Implications for treatment are presented to attempt to reduce the number of injuries during walking in patients with DM and peripheral neuropathy.

No abstract

Anterior hip or groin pain is a common complaint for which people are referred for physical therapy, with the hip region being involved in approximately 5% to 9% of injuries in high school athletes.1 Although anterior hip pain is known to result from a number of musculoskeletal and systemic pathologies, a tear of the acetabular labrum is a recent addition to the list that is of particular interest to physical therapists. This mechanically induced pathology is thought to result from excessive forces at the hip joint2,3 and has been proposed as part of a continuum of hip joint disease that may result in articular cartilage degeneration.2 Although the number of recent articles in the orthopedic literature identifying acetabular labral tears as a source of hip pain is increasing, labral tears often evade detection, resulting in a long duration of symptoms, greater than 2 years on average, before diagnosis.4–8 Studies have shown that 22% of athletes with groin pain9 and 55% of patients with mechanical hip pain of unknown etiology2 were found to have a labral tear upon further evaluation. In order to provide the most appropriate intervention for patients with anterior hip or groin pain, physical therapists should be knowledgeable about all of the possible sources and causes of this pain, including a tear of the acetabular labrum and the possible factors contributing to these tears. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to review the anatomy and function of the acetabular labrum and present current concepts on the etiology, clinical characteristics, diagnosis, and treatment of labral tears.

Hemiparetic subjects present with movement deficits including weakness, spasticity and an inability to isolate movement to one or a few joints. Voluntary attempts to move a single joint often result in excessive motion at adjacent joints. We investigated whether the inability to individuate joint movements is associated with deficits in functional reaching. Controls and hemiparetic subjects performed two different reaching movements and three individuated arm movements, all in the parasagittal plane. The reaching movements were a sagittal 'reach up' (shoulder flexion and elbow flexion) and 'reach out' (shoulder flexion and elbow extension). Joint individuation was assessed by getting each subject to perform an isolated flexion-extension movement at each of the shoulder, elbow and wrist joints. In addition, we measured strength, muscle tone and sensation using standard clinical instruments. Hemiparetic subjects showed varying degrees of impairment when performing reaching movements and individuated joint movements. Reaching impairments (hand path curvature, velocity) were worse in the reach out versus the reach up condition. Typical joint individuation abnormalities were excessive flexion of joints that should have been held fixed during movement of the instructed joint. Hemiparetic subjects tended to produce concurrent flexion motions of shoulder and elbow joints when attempting any movement, one explanation for why they were better at the 'reach up' than the 'reach out' task. Hierarchical regression analysis showed that impaired joint individuation explained most of the variance in the reach path curvature and end point error; strength explained most of the variance in reaching velocity. Sensation also contributed significantly, but spasticity and strength were not significant in the model. We conclude that the deficit in joint individuation reflects a fundamental motor control problem that largely explains some aspects of voluntary reaching deficits of hemiparetic subjects.

We studied how acute hemiparesis affects the ability to perform purposeful movements of proximal versus distal upper extremity segments. Given the gradient of corticospinal input to the spinal motoneuron pools, we postulated that movement performance requiring distal segment control (grasping) should be more impaired than movement performance requiring proximal segment control (reaching) in people with hemiparesis. We tested subjects with acute hemiparesis and control subjects performing reach and reach-to-grasp movements. Three characteristics of movement performance were quantified for each movement: speed, accuracy, and efficiency. For the reach, we calculated peak wrist velocity, endpoint error, and reach path ratio. For the grasp, we calculated peak aperture rate, aperture at touch, and aperture path ratio. To evaluate the relative deficits in reaching versus grasping, performance measures were converted to z-scores using control group means and standard deviations. For both the movements, movement times were longer and performance was more variable in the hemiparetic group compared to the control group. Hemiparetic z-scores indicated that relative deficits in movement speed were small in the two movements, with deficits in grasp being slightly greater than deficits in reach. Relative deficits in accuracy showed a trend for being larger in the reach compared to the grasp, but this difference did not reach statistical significance. In contrast, relative deficits in efficiency were larger in the grasp compared to the reach, with reaching efficiency near the range of normal performance. When considering data across all three movement characteristics, the ability to perform a purposeful movement with the distal segments was not clearly more disrupted than the ability to perform a purposeful movement with the proximal segments in people with acute hemiparesis.

Study Design: Cross-sectional study of patients with mechanical low back pain (MLBP). Objective: To test the construct validity of 3 categories of a movement system impairment-based classification proposed for use with patients with MLBP. Background: A pathoanatomic basis for directing treatment has not proven useful in a wide variety of patients with MLBP. In addition, there is a paucity of data describing the movement system impairments that characterize many of the pathoanatomically based MLBP diagnoses. Because of the mechanical nature of MLBP, a system based on groups of signs and symptoms relevant to conservative management needs to be developed. Methods and Measures: A movement system impairment-based classification was proposed that defined 5 categories of MLBP based on the findings from a standardized examination. Using the examination, 5 physical therapists examined a total of 188 patients with MLBP. A principal components analysis with an oblique rotation was conducted. Eigenvalues were plotted and a scree test was used to determine the number of factors to retain. A split-sample cross-validation procedure was conducted to verify the factor structure. Results: Three factors were identified in both samples: 2 factors related to symptoms with lumbar rotation and lumbar extension alignments or movements, and 1 factor related to signs of lumbar rotation with different alignments and movements. Conclusion: Our results provide support for 3 factors related to 3 of the 5 proposed categories: lumbar rotation with extension, lumbar rotation, and lumbar extension. The existence of these 3 factors provides preliminary evidence for specific clusters of tests of alignment and movement impairments that could be used in classifying patients with MLBP into movement-system-related categories.