Abstract
Objectives The goal of this study was to evaluate the importance of personalization when selecting foot progression angle modifications that aim to reduce the peak knee adduction moment in individuals with medial knee osteoarthritis.
Design One hundred seven individuals with medial knee osteoarthritis walked on an instrumented treadmill with biofeedback instructing them to toe-in and toe-out by 5° and 10° relative to their self-selected foot progression angle. We selected individuals’ personalized foot progression angle as the modification that maximally reduced their larger knee adduction moment peak. Additionally, we used lasso regression to identify which secondary changes in kinematics made a 10° toe-in gait modification more effective at reducing the first knee adduction moment peak.
Results Sixty-six percent of individuals reduced their larger knee adduction moment peak by at least 5% with a personalized foot progression angle modification, which is more than (p<0.001) the 54% and 23% of individuals who reduced it with a uniformly-assigned 10° toe-in or toe-out modification, respectively. When toeing-in, greater reductions in the first knee adduction moment peak were related to an increased frontal-plane tibia angle (knee more medial than ankle), a more valgus knee abduction angle, reduced contralateral pelvic drop, and a more medialized center of pressure in the foot reference frame.
Conclusions Personalization increases the proportion of individuals with medial knee osteoarthritis who may benefit from modification of their foot progression angle.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Trial
Study associated with clinicaltrials.gov NCT02767570
Funding Statement
SDU and MAB were funded by fellowships from the National Science Foundation (DGE-114747, DGE-1656518) and the Stanford Office of the Vice Provost for Graduate Education. This work was also supported by grant P41 EB027060 from the National Institutes of Health and by Merit Review award I01 RX001811 from the United States Department of Veterans Affairs Rehabilitation Research and Development Service. The contents of this work do not represent the views of the Department of Veterans Affairs or the United States Government. The funding sources did not play a role in study design, collection, analysis and interpretation of data; writing of the manuscript; nor the decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The Stanford University Institutional Review Board approved research protocol and informed consent documents.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The dataset and lasso regression code are available at: https://github.com/suhlrich/ToeInKAMReduction.
