English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Difficulty quantifying knee loading deficits clinically in individuals following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLr) may underlie their persistence. Expense associated with quantifying knee moments (KMom) and power (KPow) with gold standard techniques precludes their use in the clinic. As segment and joint kinematics are used to calculate moments and power, it is possible that more accessible inertial sensor technology can be used to identify knee loading deficits. However, it is unknown if angular velocities measured with inertial sensors provide meaningful information regarding KMom/KPow during dynamic tasks post-ACLr. Twenty-one individuals 5.1 ± 1.5 months post-ACLr performed a single limb loading task, bilaterally. Data collected concurrently using a marker-based motion system and gyroscopes positioned lateral thighs/shanks. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC)(2,k) determined concurrent validity. To determine predictive ability of angular velocities for KMom/KPow, separate stepwise linear regressions performed using peak thigh, shank, and knee angular velocities extracted from gyroscopes. ICCs were greater than 0.947 (p &lt; 0.001) for all variables. Thigh (r = 0.812 and r = 0.585; p &lt; 0.001) and knee (r = 0.806 and r = 0.536; p &lt; 0.001) angular velocities were strongly and moderately correlated to KPow and KMom, respectively. High ICCs indicated strong agreement between measurement systems. Thigh angular velocity (R² = 0.66; p &lt; 0.001) explained 66% of variance in KPow suggesting gyroscopes provide meaningful information regarding KPow. Less expensive inertial sensors may be helpful in identifying deficits clinically.

sensors

Inertial Sensor Angular Velocities Reflect Dynamic Knee Loading during Single Limb Loading in Individuals Following Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction