Karin Grävare Silbernagel

Background: Exercises that provide progressive therapeutic loading are a central component of patellofemoral pain rehabilitation, but quantitative evidence on patellofemoral joint loading is scarce for a majority of common weightbearing rehabilitation exercises. Purpose: To define a loading index to quantify, compare, rank, and categorize overall loading levels in the patellofemoral joint across 35 types of weightbearing rehabilitation exercises and activities of daily living. Study Design: Descriptive laboratory study. Methods: Model-estimated knee flexion angles and extension moments based on motion capture and ground-reaction force data were used to quantify patellofemoral joint loading in 20 healthy participants who performed each exercise. A loading index was computed via a weighted sum of loading peak and cumulative loading impulse for each exercise. The 35 rehabilitation exercises and daily living activities were then ranked and categorized into low, moderate, and high “loading tiers” according to the loading index. Results: Overall patellofemoral loading levels varied substantially across the exercises and activities, with loading peak ranging from 0.6 times body weight during walking to 8.2 times body weight during single-leg decline squat. Most rehabilitation exercises generated a moderate level of patellofemoral joint loading. Few weightbearing exercises provided low-level loading that resembled walking or high-level loading with both high magnitude and duration. Exercises with high knee flexion tended to generate higher patellofemoral joint loading compared with high-intensity exercises. Conclusion: This study quantified patellofemoral joint loading across a large collection of weightbearing exercises in the same cohort. Clinical Relevance: The visualized loading index ranks and modifiable worksheet may assist clinicians in planning patient-specific exercise programs for patellofemoral pain rehabilitation.

We aimed to (1) compare pain, tendon structure, lower limb function, and Achilles tendon loads while running between limbs in runners with Achilles tendinopathy, and (2) explore the relations of pain, tendon structure, and lower limb function to Achilles tendon loads while running. Twenty runners with Achilles tendinopathy participated in this pilot study. Pain was assessed with questionnaires, quantitative sensory testing, and functional testing. Tendon morphology and mechanical properties were evaluated with ultrasound imaging, continuous shear wave elastography, and ultrasound imaging combined with dynamometry. Lower limb function was assessed with an established test battery. Achilles tendon loads were estimated from biomechanical data acquired during running. Compared to the least symptomatic limb, the most symptomatic limb had lower scores on the Victorian Institute of Sports Assessment – Achilles questionnaire and worse pain during drop countermovement jumping, hopping, and running. Tendon thickness and cross‐sectional area were greater, and Young's modulus, drop countermovement jump height, and plyometric quotient during hopping were lower on the most symptomatic limb. Side‐to‐side differences in drop countermovement jump height were significantly associated with side‐to‐side differences in Achilles tendon peak forces and average loading rates during running. Various measures of pain, structure, and function differ between limbs in runners with Achilles tendinopathy during return‐to‐sport. Tendon forces, however, do not differ between limbs during comfortable running. In addition to measures that differ between limbs, measures of performance during drop countermovement jumping may aid in clinical decision‐making during return‐to‐sport because they are associated with tendon forces while running.