2008
DOI: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2008.04.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Validation of a method to measure the proprioception of the knee

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

3
34
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(38 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
(27 reference statements)
3
34
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Our findings are similar to a previous study showing MDS scores of 0.05 ± 0.02 at the hip and 0.09 ± 0.04 at the knee, while people with a spinal cord injury had scores up to approximately 1.9 (Chisholm et al 2015). As well, the evaluation of passive MDS at the knee has revealed a mean score of 0.58° (95 % confidence interval 0.53°-0.62°) among young able-bodied adults (Boerboom et al 2008). Individuals with an injured knee demonstrated passive MDSs ranging from 0.5° to 12° (including extension and flexion movements) compared to 0.5°-3.0° in the control group (Fridén et al 1996).…”
Section: Intersubject Variability In Lower Limb Proprioceptive Sensesupporting
confidence: 89%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Our findings are similar to a previous study showing MDS scores of 0.05 ± 0.02 at the hip and 0.09 ± 0.04 at the knee, while people with a spinal cord injury had scores up to approximately 1.9 (Chisholm et al 2015). As well, the evaluation of passive MDS at the knee has revealed a mean score of 0.58° (95 % confidence interval 0.53°-0.62°) among young able-bodied adults (Boerboom et al 2008). Individuals with an injured knee demonstrated passive MDSs ranging from 0.5° to 12° (including extension and flexion movements) compared to 0.5°-3.0° in the control group (Fridén et al 1996).…”
Section: Intersubject Variability In Lower Limb Proprioceptive Sensesupporting
confidence: 89%
“…This finding may be related to differences in proprioceptive acuity between opposing muscle groups (Corrigan et al 1992). Corrigan et al (1992) suggest that the difference between muscle dominance, such as a larger hamstring group, results in heightened proprioceptive sensitivity in flexion However, other studies have found that the knee is more sensitive to passive movements towards extension when the knee starts from a less flexed position, and more sensitive to movement towards flexion when the knee starts at a more flexed position (Fridén et al 1996;Boerboom et al 2008). Such findings may suggest why hip flexion during MDS was more sensitive than extension as our target position was set at 25° hip flexion.…”
Section: Intersubject Variability In Lower Limb Proprioceptive Sensementioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this study a device was used based on a prototype of Friden and Roberts and previously validated to measure TTDPM. 16 The device has a high reliability with a measurement error of 0.03 • . 16 A platform with a revolving sled was mounted on a former hospital bed.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To measure TDPM, input from vision and cutaneous receptors is typically minimized, and the joint, tested in midrange, is moved passively at a slow rate of less than 1°/s, until the subject reports a sensation of movement. 6 At the knee, measures of joint reposition sense have not correlated with measures of TDPM, 19 which supports the notion that, both functionally and mechanistically, the 2 sensory modalities are likely distinct.…”
mentioning
confidence: 78%