Abstract
Purpose This study aimed to determine differences in the Achilles tendon loading during rehabilitation exercises for Achilles tendinopathy (AT), and the ranking of these exercises in patients with AT and controls.
Methods Sixteen patients with AT (5F & 11M, 44.1 ± 12.9yr) and sixteen controls (4F & 12M, 39.4 ± 15.6yr) performed rehabilitation exercises while 3D motion and ground reaction forces were measured. Musculoskeletal modeling was used to compute joint kinematics and triceps surae muscle forces. Individual triceps surae muscle forces were summed to estimate Achilles tendon load. Subsequently, peak Achilles tendon loading, loading impulse, loading rate, loading indexes (combining the different loading parameters), and ankle and knee angles at the time of peak loading were determined.
Results Patients with AT have a significantly reduced peak loading of the Achilles tendon compared to controls during the exercises with the highest peak loading: unilateral heel drop with flexed knee (3.66 ± 0.90BW [AT] vs. 4.65 ± 1.10BW [Control], p=0.003, d=0.979) and walking (3.37 ± 0.49BW [AT] vs. 3.68 ± 0.33BW [Control], p=0.044, d=0.742). Furthermore, ankle dorsiflexion and knee flexion were reduced during unilateral heel drop with a flexed knee for the AT group. The ranking of exercises by peak loading or loading index was similar for people with and without AT. However, the ranking of exercises depends on the parameter used to define Achilles tendon loading.
Conclusion During the highest load-imposing exercises, patients with AT employ compensatory strategies to reduce the load on their Achilles tendon. Clear instructions and feedback on the patient’s performance are crucial as altered exercise execution influences Achilles tendon loading.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Funding for this research was provided by the FWO research project (G098222N).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The Ethical Committee of UZ/KU Leuven gave ethical approval for this work.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors.
