Clinical features of patellar tendinopathy and their implications for rehabilitation

Authors

  • Kay M. Crossley,

    1. Centre for Health, Exercise and Sports Medicine, School of Physiotherapy, The University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Kaviraj Thancanamootoo,

    1. Centre for Health, Exercise and Sports Medicine, School of Physiotherapy, The University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Ben R. Metcalf,

    1. Centre for Health, Exercise and Sports Medicine, School of Physiotherapy, The University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Jill L. Cook,

    1. Musculoskeletal Research Centre, School of Physiotherapy, La Trobe University, Victoria, Australia
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Craig R. Purdam,

    1. Department of Physical Therapies, Australian Institute of Sport, Belconnen, Australian Capital Territory, Australia
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Stuart J. Warden

    Corresponding author
    1. Centre for Health, Exercise and Sports Medicine, School of Physiotherapy, The University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    2. Department of Physical Therapy, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, Indiana University, Indianapolis, Indiana
    • Centre for Health, Exercise and Sports Medicine, School of Physiotherapy, The University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Telephone: 1-317-278-8401; Fax: 1-317-278-1876
    Search for more papers by this author

Abstract

This study investigated the clinical features of patellar tendinopathy (PT), with focus on individuals with unilateral and bilateral PT. A cross-sectional study design was employed to compare individuals with unilateral (n = 14) or bilateral (n = 13) PT and those without PT (control, n = 31). Features assessed included thigh strength (normalized peak knee extensor torque) and flexibility (sit-and-reach and active knee extension), calf endurance (heel-rise test), ankle flexibility (dorsiflexion), alignment measures (arch height and leg length difference), and functional measures (hop for distance and 6 m hop test). Groups were matched for age and height; however, unilateral and bilateral PT had greater mass with a higher body mass index (BMI) than control. Also, bilateral PT performed more sport hours per week than both unilateral PT and control. Unilateral PT had less thigh strength than control and bilateral PT, whereas bilateral PT had more thigh flexibility than control and unilateral PT. Both unilateral and bilateral PT had altered alignment measures compared to control. Features that predicted symptoms in PT were lower thigh flexibility and strength, whereas those that predicted function were higher thigh strength and lower ankle flexibility. These findings indicate that unilateral and bilateral PT represent distinct entities, and that thigh strength appears particularly important in PT as it predicted both symptoms and function in PT. © 2007 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 25:1164–1175, 2007

Ancillary