preview

Case Study Of Patients With Inju

Better Essays

We initially selected 45 patients with knee OA. Of these, 34 patients signed the Free 134 and Informed Consent Term and met the inclusion criteria for participation in the study. The 135 mean age was 59.29 ± 7.81 years, height of 158.00 ± 7.26 cm, weight of 76.94 ± 13.27 kg, BMI of 30.94 ± 5.92 kg/cm2136 . Thirty-three (97.1%) subjects were white. Four (11.8%) subjects 137 were classified with grade 1 OA and thirty (88.2%) with grade 2 OA in the Kellgren-Lawrence 138 classification. Eleven (32.4%) subjects had bilateral injury, thirteen (38.2%) had right knee 139 injury and ten (29.4%) had left knee injury. The mean time of knee pain was 61.56 ± 52.68 140 months. Thirty-one (91.2%) subjects were non-smokers. Eight (23.5%) used some type of …show more content…

155 156 Prior to the intervention protocol, hamstring muscle flexibility was significantly lower 157 in the CKC Pool group (P=.00). In the partial evaluation, only the CKC Pool group 158 demonstrated a significant increase in flexibility (P=.04), which was even lower than the 159 flexibility of subjects in the CKC Ground group (P=.08). At the end of the protocol, both 160 groups significantly increased hamstring flexibility. In the CKC Pool group, this value 161 increased from 16.44 ± 7.80, in the initial evaluation, to 24.81 ± 8.80 cm after the protocol 162 (P=.000). On the other hand, patients in the CKC Ground group had this value increased 163 from 24.41 ± 7.54 cm to 27.20 ± 7.86 cm (P=.004). There was no loss of flexibility in both 164 groups at the 90-day evaluation (Table 3). 165 There was a significant improvement of the active ROM of right knee flexion in both 166 groups after the intervention protocol (P<.05 compared to the initial evaluation; ANOVA 297 for repeated measures. 298 299 4. DISCUSSION 300 Due to the lack of studies in the literature comparing the effectiveness of a program 301 of exercises performed in the water and on the ground for patients with knee OA, we

Get Access