Osteoarthritis is one of the major causes of immobility. Most commonly, osteoarthritis manifests at the knee joint. Prevalence of knee osteoarthritis (KNOA) increases with age. Another important risk factor for KNOA is obesity. Research has shown that obese subjects have almost four times the risk of developing KNOA, which may be explained by both an increased knee loading. In medial compartment KNOA, the knee adduction moment (KAM) during gait is considered a marker for disease severity. KAM is dependent of the magnitude of the ground reaction force and its moment arm relative to the knee joint centre. In addition, obesity has been reported to augment KAM during gait. However, after removal of the direct contributions of body weight, KAM parameters may be different due to obesity-related gait adaptations to limit knee loading. While KAM has been thoroughly investigated during gait, little is known about KAM during stair negotiation, during which knee loads are higher compared to gait. The aim of the current study is therefore to compare normalized KAM during the stance phase of stair negotiation between lean KNOA patients, obese KNOA patients, and healthy controls. This case control study included 20 lean controls, 14 lean KNOA patients, and 16 obese KNOA patients. All subjects ascended and descended a two-step staircase at a self-selected, comfortable speed. Radiographic imaging and MRI were used to evaluate knee cartilage and KNOA status. Motion analysis was performed with a three-dimensional motion capture system. Kinetic data were obtained by one force platform. The parameters of study included: stance phase duration, toe-out angle, KAM peaks and KAM impulse. During stair ascent obese KNOA patients showed a longer stance phase than healthy controls (P 0.050). Despite high between-subject variability, KAM impulse was found 45% higher in the obese KNOA group during stair descent, when compared to healthy controls (P =0.012). The absence of a significant effect of groups on the normalized KAM during stair negotiation may be explained by a lower ambulatory speed in the obese KNOA group, that effectively lowers GRFz. Decreasing ambulatory speed may be an effective strategy to lower KAM during stair negotiation.

In orthopaedics new objective functional outcome tools are required to validate the benefits of new surgical techniques or implants for which classic scores such as the KSS, HHS or Womac have been shown not to be discriminative enough. Inertia based motion analysis (IMA) is a cheap, fast and simple technique which requires no gait lab or specialist personnel and thus is suitable for routine clinical outcome assessment. IMA on gait has been validated for total knee replacement (TKR) but normal gait was considered not demanding enough for certain orthopaedic differences. Sit-stand-Sit is a more demanding task of daily activity which can be assessed quickly during consultation. This study investigates whether an IMA assessed sit-stand-sit test can differentiate healthy subjects from pre-op TKR patients.

Rising (sit-to-stand) from a chair and sitting down (stand-to-sit) at comfortable, self-selected speed was measured three time using a triaxial accelerometer (range: +/−2g, f=100Hz, 64×62×13mm, m=54g) taped to the sacrum. The chair (no armrests) was height adjustable (legs at 90deg flexion) to level the effort for different body heights.

70 healthy volunteers (f/m=48/22, age range: 17–81yrs) were compared to a pathological group of 20 patients with knee osteoarthritis indicated for unilateral TKR (Biomet Vanguard) measured at 1–10 days pre-op (f/m=11/9; mean age: 65.6yrs, range: 45–79; KSS: 43.5, range: 5–65). The healthy group was split into two subgroups, an age-matched “Old” group (> 50yrs: n1=28, mean age: 65.2yrs) and a “Young” group (< 50yrs: n2=32, mean age: 28.0yrs).

Motion parameters derived were the time to stand up (Tup), time to sit down (Tdwn), the time difference between rising and sitting down (Tu−d) and the combined time of rising and sitting down (tu+d) as mean values and per individual repetition.

All motion parameters were sign. slower with higher variance for the pre-TKR versus the healthy subjects, even when compared to the age-matched subgroup (except Tu−d). Threshold values could be defined to delineate healthy from pathological performance, e.g. Tup> 220ms (6/70=9% vs 17/20=85%, p< 0.01) or Tdwn> 240ms (4/70=6% vs 18/20=90%, p< 0.01) producing high test sensitivity (90%, C.I. 72–98) and specificity (94%, C.I. 89–97). In some false positives (3/6) originally unknown orthopaedic problems were identified in retrospect.

The simple IMA assessed sit-stand-sit test produced motion parameters comparable to values reported for smaller subject groups using methods unsuitable for routine clinical application (e.g. electrogoniometry). Healthy and pathological motion could be distinguished with high sensitivity and specificity even versus age matched controls supporting the validity to use the IMA assessed sit-stand-sit test to complement classic outcome scores with an objective functional component.

Modern orthopaedics increasingly demands objective functional outcome assessment beyond classic scores and tests suffering from subjectivity, pain dominance and ceiling effects. Inertia based motion analysis (IMA) is a simple method and validated for gait in knee arthroplasty patients. This study investigates whether IMA assessed stair climbing can distinguish between healthy and pathological subjects and is able to diagnose a meniscal tear (MT).

Following standard physical examination (McMurray, rotation pain), 37 patients (18–72yrs) received arthroscopy suspecting a meniscal tear resulting from trauma, degeneration or both. Arthroscopy identified the presence or absence of MT and the osteoarthritis level (Outerbridge).

Prior to arthroscopy, the ascending and descending five stairs twice at preferred speed and without the use of handrails was measured using a triaxial accelerometer (62×41×18mm; m=53g; f=100Hz) taped to the sacrum. Based on peak detection algorithms, temporal motion parameters were derived such as step time up and down (Tup, Tdown), the difference between step time up and down (Tup-down), step irregularity (step time difference of subsequent steps) and step asymmetry (step time difference between affected and non-affected leg).

Patients were compared to a control group of 100 healthy subjects (17–81yrs) without any known orthopaedic pathology. Using the results of arthroscopy, test sensitivity and specificity for differentiating healthy and pathologic subjects and for diagnosing MT were calculated based on threshold values.

Sensitivity and specificity for detecting pathological motion was 0.68 (CI 0.50–0.81) and 0.92 for the most sensitive parameter (Tdown). Sensitivity and specificity to detect MT was 0.74 and 0.25 percent overall compared to 0.53 and 0.50 for the McMurray. Sensitivity increased to 1.00 when MT was combined with a chondropathy scale III or IV (McMurray 0.33).

IMA assessed stair climbing can distinguish healthy and pathological subjects and detect the presence of MT with better sensitivity than classic scores especially when combined with severe chondropathy. IMA is a simple and fast clinical outcome measure suitable for routine follow-up and may support the diagnosis of meniscal tears prior to arthroscopy.

To clinically diagnose and postoperatively monitor the younger or more demanding orthopaedic patients it becomes increasingly important to measure function beyond the capacity of classic scores suffering from subjectivity, pain dominance and ceiling effects. This study investigates whether a stair climbing test with accelerometer derived motion parameters in a group of healthy subjects is clinically feasible and valid to distinguish between demographic differences.

The ascending and descending of stairs (preferred speed, no handrails) was measured in 46 healthy subjects (19m/27f, no orthopaedic pathology) using a triaxial accelerometer attached with a belt to the sacrum. The study group was divided in two age groups: young group (15m/16f; age: 25 [21–38]) and old group (4m/11f; age: 67 [54–74]). Motion parameters were derived by acceleration peak detection algorithms based on step times: tup, tdown, tup-tdown,, step irregularity: irrup, irrdown and asymmetry: asymup, asymdown.

Step times were slightly higher ascending (tup=606ms) than descending (tdown=575ms, p< 0.05). The step time difference between ascending and descending (tup-tdown=31ms) showed a significant difference between the young (47ms) and elderly (−7ms). All subjects with descending times ≥20ms slower than ascending (6/46) were elderly. Irregularity and asymmetry were similar between stepping direction and age groups. Asymmetry identified the dominant leg with equal or faster steps than the non-dominant leg in 43/46 cases. Motion parameters were not correlated to gender, height or BMI.

Slower step times down than up seem a promising parameter to detect general or bilateral orthopaedic pathologies. Asymmetry identifying the dominant leg shall detect unilateral pathologies. The accelerometer assessed stair test seems suitable for routine clinical follow-up complementing classic scores.