Correlation study of knee joint proprioception test results using common test methods

Abstract

[Purpose] To study the correlation of the results obtained from different proprioception test methods, namely, the joint angle reset method, the motion minimum threshold measurement method, and the force sense reproduction method, performed on the same subjects’ knees. [Subjects and Methods] Different proprioception test methods, the joint angle reset method, the motion minimum threshold measurement method and the force sense reproduction method were used to test the knees of 30 healthy young men. [Results] Correlations were found in the following descending order from strong to weak: the correlation between the joint angle reset method and the force sense reproduction method (correlation coefficient of 0.41), the correlation between the joint angle reset method and the motion minimum threshold measurement method (correlation coefficient of 0.29), the correlation between the motion minimum threshold measurement method and the force sense reproduce method (correlation coefficient of 0.15). [Conclusion] No correlation was found among the results obtained using the joint angle reset method, the motion minimum threshold measurement method and the force sense reproduction method. Therefore, no correlation was found among the position sense, the motion sense and the force sense represented by these methods. Using the results of only one of the test methods to represent proprioception is one-sided. Force sensation depends more on the sensory input of information from the Golgi tendon organs, motion sense depends more on the input information of the muscle spindles, and position sense relies on the double input information of the muscle spindles and the Golgi tendon organs.

Relationship between Joint Position Sense, Force Sense, and Muscle Strength and the Impact of Gymnastic Training on Proprioception

“…Nevertheless, it should be pointed out that, despite slightly worse steadiness, gymnasts had better accuracy in 50% MVC extension task. To summarize, despite intergroup differences in JPS and FS, these results support previous research demonstrating no linear correlation between accuracy of JPS and FS [ 19 , 41 ].…”

An Investigation Into Force Sense at the Shoulder

“…From our current dataset, we can conclude that the effect of angle on shoulder force sense behavior is different from shoulder JPS, where both CE and accuracy improved with increased humeral elevation (King et al, 2013;Suprak et al, 2006). The differing behavior between JPS and force sense may be a contributing factor as to why a correlation has not yet been found between them at any joint (Docherty et al, 2004;Kim et al, 2014;Li et al, 2016).…”

“…This same effect is not reflected at the knee (Iwańska, Karczewska, Madej, & Urbanik, 2015) or the index finger (Walsh, Taylor, & Gandevia, 2011). Another study at the knee (Li et al, 2016) and shoulder (Dover & Powers, 2003) did examine force sense at different joint angles but did not report angle effects. One ankle study did show a greater overshoot as load increased (Dos Santos Haupenthal et al, 2015), but the index finger showed the opposite trend (Walsh et al, 2011).…”

“…When a muscle contracts isometrically, the firing rate of muscles spindles does increase due to alpha-gamma motor neuron coactivation, but it is hypothesized that these impulses are filtered out as no movement illusions occur (McCloskey, Gandevia, Potter, & Colebatch, 1983). Another possible reason for lower focus on force sense is that no relationship has been identified between force sense and JPS or kinesthesia at any joint (Docherty, Arnold, Zinder, Granata, & Gansneder, 2004;Kim, Choi, & Kim, 2014;Li, Ji, Li, & Liu, 2016). As JPS and kinesthesia focus on joint angles, which arguably emphasize the mechanical receptor that is considered most important (muscle spindles), this lack of interrelationship between the subdivisions makes it difficult to establish the importance of force sense in clinical or athletic settings.…”

Psychometric properties of knee proprioception tests targeting healthy individuals and those with anterior cruciate ligament injury managed with or without reconstruction: a systematic review protocol

“…5 s]),19 21 22 force perception/load identification (the ability to differentiate between different loads/weights),23 velocity sense (the ability to actively reproduce the velocity of a passive movement),21 active movement extent discrimination (AMEDA, the ability to discriminate between two or more active movements of different ranges of motion)24 or psychophysical threshold methods (the ability to detect and discriminate between different joint positions following passive movements)25 are also reported. However, it appears important to differentiate tests based on the specific targeted sense of proprioception due to the reported lack of correlation between knee position sense, motion sense and force sense 26. Regardless of the targeted proprioceptive sense, there are many factors to be considered when designing a knee joint proprioception test such as determining body position, whether the knee should be weight-bearing or non-weight-bearing, knee angles and speed of movement, occluding visual input, restricting other somatosensory information and minimising extraneous variables.…”