• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of athletic training >Strengthening of the Hip and Core Versus Knee Muscles for the Treatment of Patellofemoral Pain: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial
【24h】

Strengthening of the Hip and Core Versus Knee Muscles for the Treatment of Patellofemoral Pain: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial

机译：髋部和核心与膝部肌肉的对比治疗for骨股骨疼痛：多中心随机对照试验。

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Context: Patellofemoral pain (PFP) is the most common injury in running and jumping athletes. Randomized controlled trials suggest that incorporating hip and core strengthening (HIP) with knee-focused rehabilitation (KNEE) improves PFP outcomes. However, no randomized controlled trials have, to our knowledge, directly compared HIP and KNEE programs. Objective: To compare PFP pain, function, hip- and knee-muscle strength, and core endurance between KNEE and HIP protocols after 6 weeks of rehabilitation. We hypothesized greater improvements in (1) pain and function, (2) hip strength and core endurance for patients with PFP involved in the HIP protocol, and (3) knee strength for patients involved in the KNEE protocol. Design: Randomized controlled clinical trial. Setting: Four clinical research laboratories in Calgary, Alberta; Chicago, Illinois; Milwaukee, Wisconsin; and Augusta, Georgia. Patients or Other Participants: Of 721 patients with PFP screened, 199 (27.6%) met the inclusion criteria (66 men [31.2%], 133 women [66.8%], age = 29.0 ± 7.1 years, height = 170.4 ± 9.4 cm, weight = 67.6 ± 13.5 kg). Intervention(s): Patients with PFP were randomly assigned to a 6-week KNEE or HIP protocol. Main Outcome Measure(s): Primary variables were self-reported visual analog scale and Anterior Knee Pain Scale measures, which were conducted weekly. Secondary variables were muscle strength and core endurance measured at baseline and at 6 weeks. Results: Compared with baseline, both the visual analog scale and the Anterior Knee Pain Scale improved for patients with PFP in both the HIP and KNEE protocols (P < .001), but the visual analog scale scores for those in the HIP protocol were reduced 1 week earlier than in the KNEE group. Both groups increased in strength (P < .001), but those in the HIP protocol gained more in hip-abductor (P = .01) and -extensor (P = .01) strength and posterior core endurance (P = .05) compared with the KNEE group. Conclusions: Both the HIP and KNEE rehabilitation protocols produced improvements in PFP, function, and strength over 6 weeks. Although outcomes were similar, the HIP protocol resulted in earlier resolution of pain and greater overall gains in strength compared with the KNEE protocol.
机译：背景：Pat股骨头疼痛（PFP）是跑步和跳跃运动员中最常见的伤害。随机对照试验表明，将髋部和核心强化（HIP）与膝关节重点康复（KNEE）结合可以改善PFP的预后。但是，据我们所知，尚无直接比较HIP和KNEE计划的随机对照试验。目的：比较康复6周后KNEE和HIP方案之间的PFP疼痛，功能，臀部和膝部肌肉的力量以及核心耐力。我们假设在（1）疼痛和功能，（2）参与HIP方案的PFP患者的髋部力量和核心耐力以及（3）参与KNEE方案的患者的膝部力量方面有更大的改善。设计：随机对照临床试验。地点：阿尔伯塔省卡尔加里的四个临床研究实验室;伊利诺伊州芝加哥;威斯康星州密尔沃基;和佐治亚州的奥古斯塔（Augusta）。患者或其他参与者：在721例经过PFP筛查的患者中，有199例（27.6％）符合纳入标准（男性66例[31.2％]，女性133例[66.8％]，年龄= 29.0±7.1岁，身高= 170.4± 9.4厘米，重量= 67.6±13.5公斤）。干预措施：PFP患者被随机分配为期6周的KNEE或HIP方案。主要观察指标：主要变量是每周进行的自我报告的视觉模拟量表和前膝疼痛量表的测量。次要变量是在基线和第6周测量的肌肉力量和核心耐力。结果：与基线相比，HIP和KNEE方案的PFP患者的视觉模拟量表和膝前疼痛量表均得到改善（P <.001），但HIP方案的视觉模拟量表评分降低比KNEE组提前1周。两组的力量都增加了（P <.001），但是HIP方案中的人在髋外展肌（P = .01）和-伸肌（P = .01）和后核心耐力（P = .05）上获得了更多的优势。与KNEE小组相比。结论：HIP和KNEE康复方案均在6周内改善了PFP，功能和强度。尽管结局相似，但是与KNEE协议相比，HIP协议可以更早地缓解疼痛，并获得更大的强度提升。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号