Physical Therapy Korea (한국전문물리치료학회지)

Korean Research Society of Physical Therapy (한국전문물리치료학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison of Femoral Anteversion Angle and Determination of Reliability Measured at Three Different Anatomical References of the Tibial Crest During the Trochanteric Prominence Angle Test

  • Lee, Ji-Hyun (Dept. of Physical Therapy, The Graduate School, Yonsei University) ;
  • Yoon, Tae-Lim (Dept. of Physical Therapy, The Graduate School, Yonsei University) ;
  • Choi, Sil-Ah (Dept. of Physical Therapy, The Graduate School, Yonsei University) ;
  • Cynn, Heon-Seock (Dept. of Physical Therapy, College of Health Science, Yonsei University, Dept. of Ergonomic Therapy, The Graduate School of Health and Environment, Yonsei University)
  • Received : 2012.09.10
  • Accepted : 2012.11.12
  • Published : 2012.11.19
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The trochanteric prominence angle test (TPAT) has been used to measure the femoral anteversion angle between the tibial crest and the vertical line. However, the exact anatomical reference of the tibial crest has not yet been identified in the literature. Thus, the purposes of this research were twofold: first, to compare the femoral anteversion angle measured at three different anatomical references of the tibial crest (the proximal tibial crest, the proximal third of tibial crest, and the proximal half of tibial crest) and, second, to determine inter-and intra-rater reliabilities of the femoral anteversion angle measured at these three different anatomical references of the tibial crest during the TPAT. We recruited 14 healthy subjects, and a total of 28 legs were examined. The TPAT was measured using a digital inclinometer. A 1-way repeated-measure analysis of variance was used to compare the femoral anteversion angle measured at three different anatomical references of the tibial crest, and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated to determine reliability. The femoral anteversion angle measured at the proximal tibial crest was significantly higher than that at the proximal third of the tibial crest and the proximal half of the tibial crest. The inter-and intra-rater reliabilities of femoral anteversion angle were measured at three anatomic references of the tibial crest were all found to be high during the TPAT (ICC=.9 0~.98). In conclusion, clinicians should recognize that the different degrees of the femoral anteversion angle could be measured when different anatomical references of the tibial crest were used, and that reliabilities were high when an exact anatomical reference of the tibial crest was used during the TPAT.

Keywords

References

  1. Davids JR, Benfanti P, Blackhurst DW, et al. Assessment of femoral anteversion in children with cerebral palsy: Accuracy of the trochanteric prominence angle test. J Pediatr Orthop. 2002;22(2):173-178.
  2. Dunlap K, Shands AR Jr, Hollister LC, et al. A new method for determination of torsion of the femur. J Bone Joint Surg. 1953;35-A(2):289-311.
  3. Groh MM, Herrera J. A comprehensive review of hip labral tears. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2009 ;2(2):105-117. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12178-009-9052-9
  4. Gross MT. Lower quarter screening for skeletal malalignment suggestions for orthotics and shoewear. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1995;21(6):389-405. https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.1995.21.6.389
  5. Gulan G, Matovinovic D, Nemec B, et al. Femoral neck anteversion: values, development, measurement, common problems. Coll Antropol. 2000;24(2):521-527.
  6. Lee SH, Chung CY, Park MS, et al. Tibial torsion in cerebral palsy: Validity and reliability of measurement. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467(8):2098-2104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-009-0705-1
  7. Lesher JD, Sutlive TG, Miller GA, et al. Development of a clinical prediction rule for classifying patients with patellofemoral pain syndrome who respond to patellar taping. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2006;36(11):854-866. https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2006.2208
  8. Neumann DA. Kinesiology of the Musculoskeletal System: Foundations for physical rehabilitation. St. Louis, Mosby Inc, 2002:445-447.
  9. Piva SR, Fitzgerald K, Irrgang JJ, et al. Reliability of measures of impairments associated with patellofemoral pain syndrome. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2006;7:33-45. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-7-33
  10. Powers CM. The influence of altered lower-extremity kinematics on patellofemoral joint dysfunction: A theoretical perspective. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2003;33(11):639-646. https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2003.33.11.639
  11. Ruwe PA, Gage JR, Ozonoff MB, et al. Clinical determination of femoral anteversion: A comparison with established techniques. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1992;74(6):820-830.
  12. Souza RB, Powers CM. Concurrent criterion-related validity and reliability of a clinical test to measure femoral anteversion. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2009;39(8):586-592. https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2009.2996
  13. Tonnis D, Heinecke A. Acetabular and femoral anteversion: Relationship with osteoarthritis of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1999;81(12):1747-1770.
  14. Wynne-Davies R. Talipes equinovarus: A review of eighty-four cases after completion of treatment. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1964;46:464-476.