Ranking of physiotherapeutic evaluation methods as outcome measures of stifle functionality in dogs

Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica

Anna K Hielm-Björkman²  Outi M Laitinen-Vapaavuori²  Jouni T Junnila¹  Sari H Mölsä²  Heli K Hyytiäinen² 

[1]Oy 4Pharma Ltd., Ahventie 4, Espoo, 02170, Finland

[2]Department of Equine and Small Animal Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Helsinki, Viikintie 49, P.O. Box 57 , Helsinki, 00014, Finland

关键词: Testing;    Functional;    Evaluation;    Physiotherapy;    Osteoarthrosis;    Cranial cruciate ligament;    Stifle;    Canine;   

Others  :  789371
DOI  :  10.1186/1751-0147-55-29

 received in 2012-12-05, accepted in 2013-04-01,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

Various physiotherapeutic evaluation methods are used to assess the functionality of dogs with stifle problems. Neither validity nor sensitivity of these methods has been investigated. This study aimed to determine the most valid and sensitive physiotherapeutic evaluation methods for assessing functional capacity in hind limbs of dogs with stifle problems and to serve as a basis for developing an indexed test for these dogs. A group of 43 dogs with unilateral surgically treated cranial cruciate ligament deficiency and osteoarthritic findings was used to test different physiotherapeutic evaluation methods. Twenty-one healthy dogs served as the control group and were used to determine normal variation in static weight bearing and range of motion.

The protocol consisted of 14 different evaluation methods: visual evaluation of lameness, visual evaluation of diagonal movement, visual evaluation of functional active range of motion and difference in thrust of hind limbs via functional tests (sit-to-move and lie-to-move), movement in stairs, evaluation of hind limb muscle atrophy, manual evaluation of hind limb static weight bearing, quantitative measurement of static weight bearing of hind limbs with bathroom scales, and passive range of motion of hind limb stifle (flexion and extension) and tarsal (flexion and extension) joints using a universal goniometer. The results were compared with those from an orthopaedic examination, force plate analysis, radiographic evaluation, and a conclusive assessment. Congruity of the methods was assessed with a combination of three statistical approaches (Fisher’s exact test and two differently calculated proportions of agreeing observations), and the components were ranked from best to worst. Sensitivities of all of the physiotherapeutic evaluation methods against each standard were calculated.

Results

Evaluation of asymmetry in a sitting and lying position, assessment of muscle atrophy, manual and measured static weight bearing, and measurement of stifle passive range of motion were the most valid and sensitive physiotherapeutic evaluation methods.

Conclusions

Ranking of the various physiotherapeutic evaluation methods was accomplished. Several of these methods can be considered valid and sensitive when examining the functionality of dogs with stifle problems.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Hyytiäinen et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Comerford EJ, Smith K, Hayashi K: Update on the aetiopathogenesis of canine cranial cruciate ligament disease. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2011, 24:91-98.
• [2]Jerre S: Rehabilitation after extre-articular stabilisation of cranial cruciate ligament rupture in dogs. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2007, 2:148-152.
• [3]Marsolais GS, Dvorak G, Conzemius MG: Effects of postoperative rehabilitation on limb function after cranial cruciate ligament repair in dogs. J Am Vet Med Ass 2002, 9:1325-1330.
• [4]Monk ML, Preston CA, McGowan CM: Effects of early intensive postoperative physiotherapy on limb function after tibial plateau leveling osteotomy in dogs with deficiency of the cranial cruciate ligament. Am J Vet Res 2006, 67:529-536.
• [5]Mostafa AA, Griffon DJ, Thomas MW: Morphometric characteristics of the pelvic limbs of Labrador Retrievers with and without cranial cruciate ligament deficiency. Am J Vet Res 2009, 70:498-507.
• [6]Crook T, McGowan C, Pead M: Effect of passive stretching on the range of motion of osteoarthritic joints in 10 Labrador Retrievers. Vet Rec 2007, 160:545-547.
• [7]Canapp SO: The canine stifle. Clin Tech Small Anim Pract 2007, 22:195-205.
• [8]Hesbach AL: Techniques for objective outcome assessment. Clin Tech Small Anim Pract 2007, 22:146-154.
• [9]Millis DL: Assessing and measuring outcomes. In Canine Rehabilitation & Physical Therapy. 1st edition. Edited by Millis DL, Levine D, Taylor RA. USA: Saunders; 2004:211-227.
• [10]Hyytiäinen HK, Mölsä SH, Junnila JT, Laitinen-Vapaavuori OM, Hielm-Björkman AK: Use of bathroom scales in measuring asymmetry of hindlimb static weight bearing in dogs with osteoarthritis. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2012, 25:390-396.
• [11]Mölsä SH, Hielm-Björkman AK, Laitinen-Vapaavuori OM: Force platform analysis in clinically healthy Rottweilers: comparison with Labrador Retrievers. Vet Surg 2010, 39:701-707.
• [12]de Rooster H, van Bree H: Use of compression stress radiography for the detection of partial tears of the canine cruciate ligament. J Small Anim Pract 1999, 40:573-576.
• [13]Fuller CJ, Bladon BM, Driver AJ, Barr ARS: The intra- and inter-asessor reliability of measurement of functional outcome by lameness scoring horses. Vet J 2006, 171:281-286.
• [14]Quinn MM, Keuler NS, Lu Y, Faria MLE, Muir P, Markel MD: Evaluation of agreement between numerical rating scales, visual analogue scoring scales, and force plate gait analysis in dogs. Vet Surg 2007, 36:360-367.
• [15]Waxman AS, Robinson DA, Evans RB, Hulse DA, Innes JF, Conzemius MG: Relationship between objective and subjective assessment of limb function in normal dogs with and experimentally induced lameness. Vet Surg 2008, 37:241-246.
• [16]Hewetson M, Christley RM, Hunt ID, Voute LC: Investigations of the reliability of observational gait analysis for the assessment of lameness in horses. Vet Rec 2006, 24:852-858.
• [17]Evans HE, de LaHunta A: Quide to the Dissection of the Dog. 7th edition. Saunders, Elsevier: St. Louis, Missouri; 2010:51-58.
• [18]Millis DL, Taylor AR, Hoelzler M: Orthopedic and neurologic evaluation. In Canine Rehabilitation & Physical Therapy. 1st edition. Edited by Millis DL, Levine D, Taylor RA. USA: Saunders; 2004:179-210.
• [19]Risberg MA, Ekeland A: Assessment of functional tests after anterior cruciate ligament surgery. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1994, 19:212-217.
• [20]Yilmaz G, Baltaci G: Evaluation of knee strength, functional performance and sports activity level 18–24 months after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Phys Ther Sport 2006, 7:178-179.
• [21]Cole B, Finch E, Gowland C, Mayo N, ed Basmajian J: Physical rehabilitation outcome measures. Baltimore, USA: Williams & Wilkins; 1995:1-172.
• [22]Allen MJ, Leone KA, Lamonte K, Townsend KL, Mann KA: Cemented total knee replacement in 24 dogs: surgical technique, clinical results, and complications. Vet Surg 2009, 38:555-567.
• [23]Moeller EM, Allen DA, Wilson ER, Lineberger JA, Lehenbauer T: Long-term outcomes of thigh circumference, stifle range-of-motion, and lameness after unilateral tibial plateau leveling osteotomy. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2010, 23:37-42.
• [24]Baker SG, Roush JK, Unis MD, Wodiske T: Comparison of four commercial devices to measure limb circumference in dogs. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2010, 6:406-410.
• [25]Jandi AS, Schulman AJ: Incidence of motion loss of the stifle joint in dogs with naturally occurring cranial cruciate ligament rupture surgically treated with tibial plateau levelling osteotomy: longitudinal clinical study of 412 cases. Vet Surg 2007, 36:114-121.
• [26]Jaeger G, Marcellin-Little DJ, Levine D: Reliability of goniometry in Labrador Retrievers. Am J Vet Res 2002, 63:979-989.
• [27]Nicholson HL, Osmotherly PG, Smith BA, McGowan CM: Determinants of passive hip range of motion in adult Greyhounds. Aust Vet J 2007, 85:217-221.