Cargando…

A Biomechanical Comparison Shows No Difference Between Two Knee Braces used for Medial Collateral Ligament Injuries

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess the ability of 2 commonly used knee braces to control knee valgus motion and subsequent strain on the medial collateral ligament (MCL) in a laboratory-controlled environment. METHODS: Twenty healthy individuals (6 male, 14 female; mean age, 23 ± 3 yea...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gentile, Joseph M., O’Brien, Michael C., Conrad, Bryan, Horodyski, MaryBeth, Bruner, Michelle L., Farmer, Kevin W.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8220611/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34195660
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asmr.2021.03.004
_version_ 1783711178876256256
author Gentile, Joseph M.
O’Brien, Michael C.
Conrad, Bryan
Horodyski, MaryBeth
Bruner, Michelle L.
Farmer, Kevin W.
author_facet Gentile, Joseph M.
O’Brien, Michael C.
Conrad, Bryan
Horodyski, MaryBeth
Bruner, Michelle L.
Farmer, Kevin W.
author_sort Gentile, Joseph M.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess the ability of 2 commonly used knee braces to control knee valgus motion and subsequent strain on the medial collateral ligament (MCL) in a laboratory-controlled environment. METHODS: Twenty healthy individuals (6 male, 14 female; mean age, 23 ± 3 years) with no history of knee injury or brace use performed a jump landing task while wearing either no brace or 1 of 2 braces: the Playmaker and Total Range of Motion . Three-dimensional joint kinematics and kinetics were measured in our biomechanics laboratory. RESULTS: Significantly less knee dynamic valgus angulation was noted when using either brace (−0.51° ± 3.9° and −1.3° ± 3.2°) compared no brace (4.8° ± 3.0°). Dynamic valgus angulation did not differ significantly between the 2 braces tested, which were both not statistically different from baseline alignment. There were significant differences seen in peak knee flexion angle between each brace (77.9° ± 8.8°and 83.1° ± 8.4°), as well as between both braces and no brace (90.6° ± 11.1°). There was no significant difference in knee frontal plane moment or peak vertical ground reaction force loading among all 3 testing conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to no brace, both braces allowed significantly less dynamic valgus angulation of the knee under physiological vertical loads but were not significantly different from one another. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Knee braces are commonly used to protect the MCL when placed under physiological loads. It is important to know which braces effectively reduce valgus stress to provide the best outcomes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8220611
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82206112021-06-29 A Biomechanical Comparison Shows No Difference Between Two Knee Braces used for Medial Collateral Ligament Injuries Gentile, Joseph M. O’Brien, Michael C. Conrad, Bryan Horodyski, MaryBeth Bruner, Michelle L. Farmer, Kevin W. Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil Original Article PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess the ability of 2 commonly used knee braces to control knee valgus motion and subsequent strain on the medial collateral ligament (MCL) in a laboratory-controlled environment. METHODS: Twenty healthy individuals (6 male, 14 female; mean age, 23 ± 3 years) with no history of knee injury or brace use performed a jump landing task while wearing either no brace or 1 of 2 braces: the Playmaker and Total Range of Motion . Three-dimensional joint kinematics and kinetics were measured in our biomechanics laboratory. RESULTS: Significantly less knee dynamic valgus angulation was noted when using either brace (−0.51° ± 3.9° and −1.3° ± 3.2°) compared no brace (4.8° ± 3.0°). Dynamic valgus angulation did not differ significantly between the 2 braces tested, which were both not statistically different from baseline alignment. There were significant differences seen in peak knee flexion angle between each brace (77.9° ± 8.8°and 83.1° ± 8.4°), as well as between both braces and no brace (90.6° ± 11.1°). There was no significant difference in knee frontal plane moment or peak vertical ground reaction force loading among all 3 testing conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to no brace, both braces allowed significantly less dynamic valgus angulation of the knee under physiological vertical loads but were not significantly different from one another. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Knee braces are commonly used to protect the MCL when placed under physiological loads. It is important to know which braces effectively reduce valgus stress to provide the best outcomes. Elsevier 2021-04-22 /pmc/articles/PMC8220611/ /pubmed/34195660 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asmr.2021.03.004 Text en © 2021 The Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Original Article
Gentile, Joseph M.
O’Brien, Michael C.
Conrad, Bryan
Horodyski, MaryBeth
Bruner, Michelle L.
Farmer, Kevin W.
A Biomechanical Comparison Shows No Difference Between Two Knee Braces used for Medial Collateral Ligament Injuries
title A Biomechanical Comparison Shows No Difference Between Two Knee Braces used for Medial Collateral Ligament Injuries
title_full A Biomechanical Comparison Shows No Difference Between Two Knee Braces used for Medial Collateral Ligament Injuries
title_fullStr A Biomechanical Comparison Shows No Difference Between Two Knee Braces used for Medial Collateral Ligament Injuries
title_full_unstemmed A Biomechanical Comparison Shows No Difference Between Two Knee Braces used for Medial Collateral Ligament Injuries
title_short A Biomechanical Comparison Shows No Difference Between Two Knee Braces used for Medial Collateral Ligament Injuries
title_sort biomechanical comparison shows no difference between two knee braces used for medial collateral ligament injuries
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8220611/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34195660
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asmr.2021.03.004
work_keys_str_mv AT gentilejosephm abiomechanicalcomparisonshowsnodifferencebetweentwokneebracesusedformedialcollateralligamentinjuries
AT obrienmichaelc abiomechanicalcomparisonshowsnodifferencebetweentwokneebracesusedformedialcollateralligamentinjuries
AT conradbryan abiomechanicalcomparisonshowsnodifferencebetweentwokneebracesusedformedialcollateralligamentinjuries
AT horodyskimarybeth abiomechanicalcomparisonshowsnodifferencebetweentwokneebracesusedformedialcollateralligamentinjuries
AT brunermichellel abiomechanicalcomparisonshowsnodifferencebetweentwokneebracesusedformedialcollateralligamentinjuries
AT farmerkevinw abiomechanicalcomparisonshowsnodifferencebetweentwokneebracesusedformedialcollateralligamentinjuries
AT gentilejosephm biomechanicalcomparisonshowsnodifferencebetweentwokneebracesusedformedialcollateralligamentinjuries
AT obrienmichaelc biomechanicalcomparisonshowsnodifferencebetweentwokneebracesusedformedialcollateralligamentinjuries
AT conradbryan biomechanicalcomparisonshowsnodifferencebetweentwokneebracesusedformedialcollateralligamentinjuries
AT horodyskimarybeth biomechanicalcomparisonshowsnodifferencebetweentwokneebracesusedformedialcollateralligamentinjuries
AT brunermichellel biomechanicalcomparisonshowsnodifferencebetweentwokneebracesusedformedialcollateralligamentinjuries
AT farmerkevinw biomechanicalcomparisonshowsnodifferencebetweentwokneebracesusedformedialcollateralligamentinjuries