Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for

  • Author: Jean-Sébastien Roy x
Clear All Modify Search
Restricted access

Jean-Francois Esculier, Laurent J. Bouyer and Jean-Sébastien Roy

Context:

Patellofemoral pain (PFP) is one of the most frequent running-related injuries. However, few interventions taking into consideration the specificity of running have been shown to be effective in runners with PFP.

Objective:

To evaluate the effects of a multimodal rehabilitation program including lower-limb-strengthening/motor-control exercises, advice on running biomechanics, and symptoms management on symptoms, strength, and ground-reaction forces in runners with PFP.

Design:

Pre- to post- quasi-experimental.

Setting:

Gait-analysis laboratory and private physical therapy clinic.

Participants:

21 runners with PFP (34.1 ± 6.0 y old, symptoms duration 38.1 ± 45.5 mo).

Intervention:

An 8-wk multimodal rehabilitation program including lower-limb- and core-strengthening and motor-control exercises, as well as advice on running gait and symptoms management.

Main Outcome Measures:

The Activities of Daily Living Scale of the Knee Outcome Survey (KOS-ADLS) questionnaire and visual analog scales for usual pain (VAS-U), worst pain (VAS-W), and pain during running (VAS-R) were used to assess changes in symptoms and function. Vertical ground-reaction forces (VGRF) during running and lower-limb isometric strength were also measured.

Results:

Statistically and clinically significant improvements (P < .001) were reported on KOS-ADLS (+17.8 pts), VAS-U (−19.2 pts), VAS-W (−28.7 pts), and VAS-R (−32.2 pts) after the intervention. No significant changes in isometric strength were observed. The instantaneous vertical loading rate was decreased after the intervention (P = .002), and this reduction was correlated with changes in KOS-ADLS scores (P = .028).

Conclusion:

This multimodal intervention was successful in reducing pain and improving function of runners with PFP. However, no significant changes in lower-limb strength were observed. It appears that changes in VGRF combined with appropriate training advice could explain the clinical outcomes.

Open access

Amanda L. Ager, Dorien Borms, Magali Bernaert, Vicky Brusselle, Mazarine Claessens, Jean-Sébastien Roy and Ann Cools

Context: Proprioception deficits contribute to persistent and recurring physical disability, particularly with shoulder disorders. Proprioceptive training is thus prescribed in clinical practice. It is unclear whether nonsurgical rehabilitation can optimize shoulder proprioception. Objectives: To summarize the available evidence of conservative rehabilitation (ie, nonsurgical) on proprioception among individuals with shoulder disorders. Evidence Acquisition: PubMed, Web of Science, and EBSCO were systematically searched, from inception until November 24, 2019. Selected articles were systematically assessed, and the methodological quality was established using the Dutch Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were utilized for this review. The conservative treatments were categorized as follows: (1) conventional therapy, (2) proprioceptive training, (3) elastic kinesiology tape, and (4) other passive therapies. Evidence Synthesis: Twelve articles were included, yielding 58 healthy control shoulders and 362 shoulders affected by impingement syndrome, glenohumeral dislocations, nonspecific shoulder pain, rotator cuff dysfunction, or subluxation poststroke. The level of agreement between the evaluators was excellent (84.9%), and the studies were evaluated to be of fair to excellent quality (risk of bias: 28.5%–100%). This review suggests, with moderate evidence, that proprioceptive training (upper-body wobble board or flexible foil training) can improve proprioception in the midterm. No decisive evidence exists to suggest that conventional therapy is of added value to enhance shoulder proprioception. Conflicting evidence was found for the improvement of proprioception with the application of elastic kinesiology tape, while moderate evidence suggests that passive modalities, such as microcurrent electrical stimulation and bracing, are not effective for proprioceptive rehabilitation of the shoulder. Conclusions: Proprioceptive training demonstrates the strongest evidence for the effective rehabilitation of individuals with a shoulder proprioceptive deficit. Elastic kinesiology tape does not appear to affect the sense of shoulder proprioception. This review suggests a possible specificity of training effect with shoulder proprioception.