Downhill walking gait pattern discriminates between types of knee arthroplasty: improved physiological knee functionality in UKA versus TKA

Anatole V Wiik, Adeel Aqil, Sara Tankard, Andrew A Amis, Justin P Cobb, Anatole V Wiik, Adeel Aqil, Sara Tankard, Andrew A Amis, Justin P Cobb

Abstract

Purpose: To determine whether downhill walking gait pattern discriminates between different types of knee arthroplasty.

Methods: Nineteen unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and fourteen total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients who were well matched demographically and with high Oxford knee scores (OKS) for their operation type were evaluated at a minimum 1 year after their operation with downhill gait analysis. Nineteen healthy young subjects were used as controls. Downhill gait analysis was carried out on an instrumented treadmill that was ramped at the rear to produce a declination of 7°. All subjects after a period of habituation were tested for preferred and top downhill walking speed with associated ground reaction and temporospatial measurements.

Results: The UKA group had higher mean OKS (44.8 ± 2.9 vs 41.9 ± 4.7, p = 0.03) as predicted. The UKA group walked downhill 15% faster than the TKA group (1.75 ± 0.14 vs 1.52 ± 0.13 m/s, p < 0.0001) despite having the same cadence (134.9 ± 8.0 vs 133.9 ± 9.6 steps/min). This 15% difference in speed appeared largely due to a 15% increase in stride length (173 ± 14 vs 150 ± 17 cm, p = 0.0007) and normal weight acceptance, both of which were similar to the controls.

Conclusion: Using an instrumented treadmill to test a commonly performed task, stride length when walking downhill highlights the functional differences between arthroplasty groups. Near normal restoration of physiological gait pattern was found in unicompartmentals as compared to total knee replacements.

Level of evidence: Retrospective comparative study, Level III.

References

    1. Gait Posture. 2000 Feb;11(1):46-53
    1. J Arthroplasty. 2006 Jun;21(4):547-52
    1. Gait Posture. 2001 Oct;14(2):104-9
    1. Knee. 2005 Oct;12(5):358-61
    1. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 1994;2(1):2-7
    1. J Aging Phys Act. 2013 Jul;21(3):335-47
    1. Knee. 2007 Aug;14(4):275-9
    1. Phys Ther. 1990 Mar;70(3):150-7
    1. Knee. 2007 Jun;14(3):212-7
    1. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009 Jan;91(1):52-7
    1. J Biomech. 2013 Feb 1;46(3):535-40
    1. Knee. 2013 Jun;20(3):218-20
    1. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2013 Nov;21(11):2532-41
    1. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2012 Jul;94(7):919-27
    1. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012 Jan;470(1):84-90
    1. J Arthroplasty. 2012 Sep;27(8 Suppl):86-90
    1. Knee. 2012 Aug;19(4):360-4
    1. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2006 Sep;85(9):737-46
    1. J Arthroplasty. 2013 Oct;28(9 Suppl):176-8
    1. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1996 Mar;78(2):185-90
    1. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2008 Mar;23(3):320-8
    1. Gait Posture. 2004 Dec;20(3):299-303
    1. Health Policy. 1996 Jul;37(1):53-72
    1. Knee. 2008 Mar;15(2):117-24
    1. J Biomech. 2010 Jul 20;43(10):1910-5
    1. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1999 Sep;81(5):764-8
    1. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2008 Oct;16(10):973-9
    1. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006 Oct;451:101-6
    1. J Arthroplasty. 2014 Sep;29(9):1779-83
    1. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014 May;472(5):1496-501

Source: PubMed

3
Iratkozz fel