18 resultados para Control parameters
Resumo:
We investigated postural control (PC) effects of a mountain ultra-marathon (MUM): a 330-km trail run with 24000 m of positive and negative change in elevation. PC was assessed prior to (PRE), during (MID) and after (POST) the MUM in experienced ultra-marathon runners (n = 18; finish time = 126+/-16 h) and in a control group (n = 8) with a similar level of sleep deprivation. Subjects were instructed to stand upright on a posturographic platform over a period of 51.2 seconds using a double-leg stance under two test conditions: eyes open (EO) and eyes closed (EC). Traditional measures of postural stability (center of pressure trajectory analysis) and stabilogram-diffusion analysis (SDA) parameters were analysed. For the SDA, a significantly greater short-term effective diffusion was found at POST compared with PRE in the medio-lateral (ML; Dxs) and antero-posterior (AP) directions (Dys) in runners (p<0.05) The critical time interval (Ctx) in the ML direction was significantly higher at MID (p<0.001) and POST (p<0.05) than at PRE in runners. At MID (p<0.001) and POST (p<0.05), there was a significant difference between the two groups. The critical displacement (Cdx) in the ML was significantly higher at MID and at POST (p<0.001) compared with PRE for runners. A significant difference in Cdx was observed between groups in EO at MID (p<0.05) and POST (p<0.005) in the ML direction and in EC at POST in the ML and AP directions (p<0.05). Our findings revealed significant effects of fatigue on PC in runners, including, a significant increase in Ctx (critical time in ML plan) in EO and EC conditions. Thus, runners take longer to stabilise their body at POST than at MID. It is likely that the mountainous characteristics of MUM (unstable ground, primarily uphill/downhill running, and altitude) increase this fatigue, leading to difficulty in maintaining balance.
Resumo:
Introduction: Ankle arthrodesis (AD) and total ankle replacement (TAR) are typical treatments for ankle osteoarthritis (AO). Despite clinical interest, there is a lack of their outcome evaluation using objective criteria. Gait analysis and plantar pressure assessment are appropriate to detect pathologies in orthopaedics but they are mostly used in lab with few gait cycles. In this study, we propose an ambulatory device based on inertial and plantar pressure sensors to compare the gait during long-distance trials between healthy subjects (H) and patients with AO or treated by AD and TAR. Methods: Our study included four groups: 11 patients with AO, 9 treated by TAR, 7 treated by AD and 6 control subjects. An ambulatory system (Physilog®, CH) was used for gait analysis; plantar pressure measurements were done using a portable insole (Pedar®-X, DE). The subjects were asked to walk 50 meters in two trials. Mean value and coefficient of variation of spatio-temporal gait parameters were calculated for each trial. Pressure distribution was analyzed in ten subregions of foot. All parameters were compared among the four groups using multi-level model-based statistical analysis. Results: Significant difference (p <0.05) with control was noticed for AO patients in maximum force in medial hindfoot and forefoot and in central forefoot. These differences were no longer significant in TAR and AD groups. Cadence and speed of all pathologic groups showed significant difference with control. Both treatments showed a significant improvement in double support and stance. TAR decreased variability in speed, stride length and knee ROM. Conclusions: In spite of a small sample size, this study showed that ankle function after AO treatments can be evaluated objectively based on plantar pressure and spatio-temporal gait parameters measured during unconstrained walking outside the lab. The combination of these two ambulatory techniques provides a promising way to evaluate foot function in clinics.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: To compare the prognostic value of different anatomical and functional metabolic parameters determined using [(18)F]FDG-PET/CT with other clinical and pathological prognostic parameters in cervical cancer (CC). METHODS: Thirty-eight patients treated with standard curative doses of chemo-radiotherapy (CRT) underwent pre- and post-therapy [(18)F]FDG-PET/CT. [(18)F]FDG-PET/CT parameters including mean tumor standardized uptake values (SUV), metabolic tumor volume (MTV) and tumor glycolytic volume (TGV) were measured before the start of CRT. The post-treatment tumor metabolic response was evaluated. These parameters were compared to other clinical prognostic factors. Survival curves were estimated by using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox regression analysis was performed to determine the independent contribution of each prognostic factor. RESULTS: After 37 months of median follow-up (range, 12-106), overall survival (OS) was 71 % [95 % confidence interval (CI), 54-88], disease-free survival (DFS) 61 % [95 % CI, 44-78] and loco-regional control (LRC) 76 % [95 % CI, 62-90]. In univariate analyses the [(18)F]FDG-PET/CT parameters unfavorably influencing OS, DFS and LRC were pre-treatment TGV-cutoff ≥562 (37 vs. 76 %, p = 0.01; 33 vs. 70 %, p = 0.002; and 55 vs. 83 %, p = 0.005, respectively), mean pre-treatment tumor SUV cutoff ≥5 (57 vs. 86 %, p = 0.03; 36 vs. 88 %, p = 0.004; 65 vs. 88 %, p = 0.04, respectively) and a partial tumor metabolic response after treatment (9 vs. 29 %, p = 0.0008; 0 vs. 83 %, p < 0.0001; 22 vs. 96 %, p < 0.0001, respectively). After multivariate analyses a partial tumor metabolic response after treatment remained as an independent prognostic factor unfavorably influencing DFS and LRC (RR 1:7.7, p < 0.0001, and RR 1:22.6, p = 0.0003, respectively) while the pre-treatment TGV-cutoff ≥562 negatively influenced OS and DFS (RR 1:2, p = 0.03, and RR 1:2.75, p = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Parameters capturing the pre-treatment glycolytic volume and metabolic activity of [(18)F]FDG-positive disease provide important prognostic information in patients with CC treated with CRT. The post-therapy [(18)F]FDG-PET/CT uptake (partial tumor metabolic response) is predictive of disease outcome.