Elsevier

Gait & Posture

Volume 41, Issue 3, March 2015, Pages 813-819
Gait & Posture

Full length Article
Lower limb control and strength in runners with and without patellofemoral pain syndrome

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2015.02.020Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Runners with and without PFPS were assessed during treadmill running.

  • Overall, no differences in previously identified risk factors for PFPS were found.

  • Sub-analyses were performed for females and rearfoot strikers.

  • Increased HADD was found at toe-off in females and RFS with PFPS.

  • RFS with PFPS had lower GMed EMG activity and vertical ground reaction forces.

Abstract

Recreational runners with patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS) have been shown to present altered movement kinematics, muscle activations, and ground reaction forces (GRF) during running as well as decreased lower limb strength. However, these variables have never been concurrently evaluated in a specific cohort. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare lower limb control variables during running in recreational runners with and without PFPS. Lower limb control during treadmill running under typical training conditions (usual shoes, foot strike pattern, and speed) was compared between runners with (n = 21) and without (n = 20) PFPS using lower limb kinematics, electromyographic (EMG) recordings from representative muscles (gluteus medius/maximus, quadriceps and soleus), and vertical GRF. Isometric muscle strength was also evaluated. When comparing all runners from both groups, no between-group differences were found in variables commonly associated with PFPS such as peak hip adduction, hip internal rotation, contralateral pelvic drop, EMG of gluteal and quadriceps muscles, vertical loading rate, or lower limb strength. However, runners with PFPS showed significantly higher hip adduction at toe-off, lower excursion in hip adduction during late-stance, and longer duration of soleus activation. Sub-analyses were performed for females and for rearfoot strikers (RFS), and revealed that these subgroups accounted for most of between-group differences in hip adduction kinematics. Specifically for RFS with PFPS, lower activation of gluteus medius as well as lower GRF were observed. Our results suggest that deficits reported in runners with PFPS may vary depending on gender and on foot strike pattern.

Introduction

Overuse injuries are frequent in recreational runners, with a reported annual prevalence of up to 70% [1]. Patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS), described as anterior or retropatellar knee pain or pain along the lateral and medial borders of the patella [2], is the most common running injury with 17% of diagnoses [3]. Several factors have been suggested to explain the presence of PFPS including decreased muscle strength and altered mechanical loading, lower limb kinematics, and muscle activation patterns during running.

Mechanical overload is recognized as a risk factor for the development of running-related injuries [4]. Specifically in the patellofemoral joint, running induces repetitive compressive forces of up to 4.5 times the bodyweight [5]. It has been suggested by Davis et al. that runners with PFPS show higher vertical loading rates of ground reaction forces during early stance [6], which have been linked with increased patellofemoral joint forces [7].

Considering the high impact forces during running, it can be hypothesized that impaired lower limb muscle strength, or kinematics and muscle activation patterns during running should facilitate the development of PFPS [8]. Several studies have looked at these factors in runners with PFPS. For muscle strength, various findings have been reported: while cross-sectional studies reported decreased knee extensors [9] or hip abductors strength [10], [11], two prospective studies found either no difference [12] or increased abductor/adductor and decreased external/internal rotator strength ratios between runners who would eventually develop PFPS and those who would not [13]. Thus, onset of PFPS in runners may not necessarily be causally related to strength deficits.

Regarding running kinematics, different results were found in female and male runners. Female runners with PFPS show increased hip adduction (HADD) and hip internal rotation (HIR) during stance compared to controls [14], [15]. In contrast, male runners with PFPS exhibit increased contralateral pelvic drop (CPD) and HADD [16], or even increased hip abduction [17] during stance in comparison to controls. However, most of these studies did not concurrently assess muscle activation patterns to determine the mechanisms underlying such kinematic deficits. The only study to do so found delayed and shorter duration of gluteus medius (GMed) activation during the stance phase in female runners [18]. In addition, increased peak angles of HADD and HIR were correlated with delayed onset of GMed and gluteus maximus (GMax).

To our knowledge, no study has simultaneously looked at muscle strength, lower limb kinematics, muscle activations and ground reaction forces (GRF) during running in this population. The simultaneous study of all of these factors is warranted to enhance our understanding of the mechanisms underlying altered lower limb control during running. Most studies described above have specifically recruited rearfoot strikers, even though PFPS also develops in midfoot and forefoot strikers. Furthermore, standardized cushioned neutral running shoes were used in most of these studies; thus, data were collected in conditions different from the runner's typical training environment. The objective of the present study was to compare lower limb kinematics, muscle activation patterns and GRF during treadmill running, as well as lower limb strength, in recreational runners with or without PFPS regardless of foot strike pattern or footwear. We hypothesized that runners with PFPS would exhibit greater GRF, a combination of increased peak HADD, HIR and/or CPD angles and decreased activation of GMed during the stance phase of running, without concomitant strength deficits.

Section snippets

Participants

Twenty-one recreational runners with PFPS (PFPS group) and 20 runners without PFPS (Control group), matched for age, sex and foot strike pattern, were recruited (Table 1). All participants: (1) were aged between 18 and 45, (2) ran at least 15 km per week prior to enrolment, (3) had no history of rheumatoid, inflammatory or neurological disease, surgery to the lower limbs, patellar dislocation or ligamentous injury, and (4) had no other current injury to the lower limbs. Runners with PFPS were

Results

Both groups were similar in terms of gender, age, height, weight, weekly running distance, shoe type, foot strike pattern, and step frequency during running (P > 0.16; Table 1). Muscle strength (% of bodyweight) was not statistically different across groups (P > 0.35; Table 1).

Discussion

To our knowledge, this is the first study to concurrently compare lower limb muscle activations, kinematics and GRF during treadmill running as well as muscle strength in runners with and without PFPS. When pooling all of our participants, regardless of gender or foot strike pattern, no between-group differences were found in variables that have been previously associated with PFPS in runners. However, significant differences were observed in subgroups of females and RFS. Our hypothesis

Conclusion

In conclusion, no significant differences were found in lower limb strength, peak angles of HADD, HIR, or CPD, muscle activity of GMax, GMed, VMO, or VL or GRF between recreational runners with and without PFPS. Only longer duration of SOL activity and increased HADD during late stance were found in runners with PFPS. However, sub-analyses revealed gender- and foot strike-specific differences such as decreased GMed activity and lower VGRF in RFS with PFPS. Therefore, PFPS in runners may not

Conflict of interest

The authors do not have any conflict of interest to report.

Funding sources

This research project was supported by the Ordre professionnel de la physiothérapie du Québec (OPPQ). The funding source was not involved in the study's design, conduct or reporting. J.F.E. was supported by a scholarship from the Fonds de recherche du Québec - Santé (FRQ-S). J.S.R. was supported by a salary award from the FRQ-S.

Acknowledgements

The Authors would like to thank all runners who volunteered to participate in this study, as well as Mr. Guy St-Vincent, eng., MSc for his help in data collection and analysis.

References (31)

  • M. Fredericson et al.

    Physical examination and patellofemoral pain syndrome

    Am J Phys Med Rehabil

    (2006)
  • J.E. Taunton et al.

    A retrospective case-control analysis of 2002 running injuries

    Br J Sports Med

    (2002)
  • A. Hreljac

    Impact and overuse injuries in runners

    Med Sci Sports Exerc

    (2004)
  • I.S. Davis et al.

    Vertical impact loading in runners with a history of patellofemoral pain syndrome

    Med Sci Sports Exerc

    (2010)
  • R.L. Lenhart et al.

    Increasing running step rate reduces patellofemoral joint forces

    Med Sci Sports Exerc

    (2014)
  • Cited by (55)

    • Are there neuromuscular differences on proximal and distal joints in patellofemoral pain people? A systematic review and meta-analysis

      2022, Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology
      Citation Excerpt :

      Regarding the subgroup analysis by type of task, no differences were observed between groups, with high heterogeneity for single-leg squat (0.40; 95% CI [-0.21; 1.01]; p = 0.20; I2 = 77%) (Mirzaie et al. 2019; Nakagawa et al. 2012b; O'Sullivan et al. 2012; Song et al. 2015; Willson et al. 2011; Glaviano and Saliba 2019), stair/step up (0.32; 95% CI [-0.57; 1.22]; p = 0.48; I2 = 87%) (Nakagawa et al. 2012a; O'Sullivan et al. 2012; Glaviano and Saliba 2019; Saad et al. 2011), stair/step down (-0.47; 95% CI [-1.51; 0.57]; p = 0.38; I2 = 94%) (Bolgla et al. 2011; Goto et al. 2018; Nakagawa et al. 2012a; Nakagawa et al. 2011; O'Sullivan et al. 2012; Souza and Powers 2009; Glaviano and Saliba 2019; Saad et al. 2011; Ott et al. 2011) and jump (-0.11; 95% CI [-0.68; 0.46]; p = 0.70; I2 = 68%) (Bley et al. 2014; Kalytczak et al. 2016; Nakagawa et al. 2011; Souza and Powers 2009; Baellow et al. 2020) and moderate heterogeneity for running/walking (-0.09; 95% CI [-0.57; 0.36]; p = 0.72; I2 = 50%) (Esculier et al. 2015; Nakagawa et al. 2011; Willson et al. 2011; Souza and Powers 2009) (Fig. 4). The EMG amplitude of GMax was similar between groups, with high heterogeneity (-0.12; 95% CI [-0.37; 0.13]; p = 0.35; I2 = 61%) (Esculier et al. 2015; Baellow et al. 2020; Bley et al. 2014; Kalytczak et al. 2016; Glaviano and Saliba 2019; Goto et al. 2018; Mirzaie et al. 2019; Nakagawa et al. 2012b; Song et al. 2015; Souza and Powers 2009; Willson et al. 2011) (Fig. 5). When performing subgroup analysis by sex, the same result was observed and heterogeneity was high (-0.12; 95% CI [-0.47; 0.22]; p = 0.48; I2 = 72%) (Bley et al. 2014; Kalytczak et al. 2016; Glaviano and Saliba 2019; Nakagawa et al. 2012b; Song et al. 2015; Souza and Powers 2009; Willson et al. 2011; Baellow et al. 2020).

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text