Ağrısı ve Kinezyofobisi Olmayan Ortez Kullanan Bireylerin Fiziksel Aktivite Düzeylerinin Sağlıklı Kontrollerle ve Kendi Içinde Karşılaştırılması

Öz

Amaç: Ortopedik problemler nedeniyle ortez kullanımı yetişkin popülasyonda oldukça yaygındır. Ortezlerin olumlu etkileri, mevcut deformiteleri düzeltmesi, ilerlemesini engellemesi ve zayıf/yaralı bir segmenti hareketsiz hale getirmesidir. Ancak ortez kullanan ağrısız bireylerde ortezin fiziksel aktivite düzeyine etkileri henüz araştırılmamıştır. Bu kontrollü çalışma, ortez kullanan ağrısız ve kinezyofobisi olmayan bireylerin fiziksel aktivite düzeylerini araştırmış ve sonuçları sağlıklı bireylerle karşılaştırmıştır. Gereç ve Yöntem: Bu çalışmaya 18-65 yaş arası toplam 244 birey (94 ortez kullanan, 150 sağlıklı birey) katılmıştır. Nordic Kas İskelet Sistemi Anketi’ne göre ağrısız olan ve Tampa Kinesiyofobi Ölçeği'ne göre kinezyofobisi olmayan olgular çalışmaya dâhil edildi. Fiziksel aktivite, Uluslararası Fiziksel Aktivite Anketi (IPAQ) ile ölçüldü. Sonuçlar: IPAQ skorlarına göre, sağlıklı bireylerin, vücutlarının herhangi bir yerinde ortez kullananlara kıyasla istatistiksel olarak daha yüksek fiziksel aktivite düzeyine sahip olduğunu bulundu (p<0,001). Ortez alt grupları incelendiğinde; fiziksel aktivite düzeyleri açısından alt gruplar arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir fark olmadığı görüldü (p=0,906, p=0,819, p=0,537).Tartışma: Bu çalışma, ortezlerin sağladığı klinik yararların yanında bireylerde fiziksel aktivitenin önemli ölçüde azalması gibi bir komplikasyona yol açabileceğini göstermektedir. Ortez kullanan hastalarda fiziksel aktivitenin azalabileceğinin farkındalığını yaratmak ve dolayısıyla fiziksel aktivite düzeylerini artırmak rehabilitasyonun önemli bir parçası haline gelmelidir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Ortez cihazları
• Fiziksel aktivite
• Alt ekstremite
• Üst ekstremite
• Omurga

Comparison of Physical Activity Levels of Individuals Using Orthosis Without Pain and Kinesiophobia with Healthy Controls and within Themselves

Öz

Purpose: Using orthosis due to orthopedic problems are common in adults. Positive effects of orthoses are correcting existing deformities, preventing progression and immobilizing a weak/injured segment. However, the effect of orthosis on level of physical activity in pain-free individuals has not been investigated. This controlled trial investigated the level of physical activity of individuals without pain and kinesiophobia who use orthoses and compared the results with healthy individuals. Material and Methods: 244 participants (94 using orthoses, 150 healthy individuals) who were 18-65 years old participated in this study. Individuals who were painless according to the Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire and without kinesiophobia according to the Tampa Kinesiophobia Scale were included in the study. Physical activity was measured with The International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ). Results: The IPAQ scores showed that healthy individuals had a statistically higher level of physical activity compared to those who used orthotic devices for any part of their body (p<0.001). When the orthosis subgroups were analyzed, there was no statistically significant difference in physical activity amongst the subgroups (p=0.906, p=0.819, p=0.537). Discussion: This study shows that in addition to the clinical benefits provided by orthoses, they can lead to complications such as significant decrease in physical activity in individuals. Raising awareness that physical activity may decrease in patients using orthoses, and therefore increasing physical activity levels, should become an important part of rehabilitation.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Orthotic devices
• Physical activity
• Lower extremity
• Upper extremity
• Spine

Kaynakça

1. Adams, B. D., Grosland, N. M., Murphy, D. M., & McCullough, M. (2003). Impact of impaired wrist motion on hand and upper-extremity performance. J Hand Surg Am, 28(6), 898-903. doi: 10.1016/s0363-5023(03)00424-6
2. Amer, A.O., Jarl, G.M.,& Hermansson, L.N. (2014). The effect of insoles on foot pain and daily activities. Prosthet Orthot Int, 38(6), 474-480. doi: 10.1177/0309364613512369
3. Azadinia, F., Takamjani, E. E., Kamyab, M., Parnianpour, M., Cholewicki, J., & Maroufi, N. (2017). Can lumbosacral orthoses cause trunk muscle weakness? A systematic review of literature. Spine J, 17(4), 589-602. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2016.12.005
4. Bauman, A. E. (2004). Updating the evidence that physical activity is good for health: An epidemiological review 2000–2003. J Sci Med Sport, 7(1), 6-19. doi: 10.1016/s1440-2440(04)80273-1
5. Choo, Y. J., & Chang, M. C. (2020). Effectiveness of orthoses for treatment in patients with spinal pain. Yeungnam Univ J Med, 37(2), 84. doi: 10.12701/yujm.2020.00150
6. Collins, N., Bisset, L., McPoil, T., & Vicenzino, B. (2007). Foot orthoses in lower limb overuse conditions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Foot Ankle Int, 28(3), 396-412. doi: 10.3113/FAI.2007.0396
7. Craig, C. L., Marshall, A. L., Sjöström, M., Bauman, A. E., Booth, M. L., Ainsworth, B.E., et al. (2003). International Physical Activity Questionnaire: 12-country reliability and validity. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 35(8), 1381-1395. doi: 10.1249/01.MSS.0000078924.61453.FB
8. Dickinson, C., Campion, K., Foster, A., Newman, S., O'rourke, A., & Thomas, P. (1992). Questionnaire development: An examination of the Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire. Appl Ergon, 23(3), 197-201. doi: 10.1016/0003-6870(92)90225-k

9. Dinkel, D., Hassan, M., Despiegelaere, H., Johanning, J., Pipinos, I. I., & Myers, S.A. (2020). Patients with peripheral artery disease perceptions of an ankle foot orthosis: A comparison by physical activity level. Circulation, 142(3), A13282. https://doi.org/10.1161/circ.142.suppl_3.13282
10. Dvorznak, M., Fitzpatrick, K., Karmarkar, A., Kelleher, A. & McCann, T. (2006). Orthotic devices. In R.A. Cooper, H. Ohnabe, & D.A. Hopson (Eds.), An Introduction to Rehabilitation Engineering, (First Edition, pp. 261-285). USA: Taylor & Francis.
11. Elattar, O., Smith, T., Ferguson, A., Farber, D., & Wapner, K. (2018). Uses of braces and orthotics for conservative management of foot and ankle disorders. Foot Ankle Orthopaedics, 3(3), https://doi.org/10.1177/2473011418780700
12. Garber, C. E., Blissmer, B., Deschenes, M. R., Franklin, B.A., Lamonte, M.J., Lee, I. M., et al. (2011). American College of Sports Medicine position stand. Quantity and quality of exercise for developing and maintaining cardiorespiratory, musculoskeletal, and neuromotor fitness in apparently healthy adults: guidance for prescribing exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 43(7), 1334-1359. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e318213fefb
13. Hsieh, R. L., & Lee, W. C. (2014). Immediate and medium-term effects of custom-moulded insoles on pain, physical function, physical activity, and balance control in patients with knee osteoarthritis. J Rehabil Med, 46(2), 159-165. doi: 10.2340/16501977-1254
14. Kahraman, T., Genç, A. and Göz, E. (2016). The Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire: Cross-cultural adaptation into Turkish assessing its psychometric properties. Disabil Rehabil, 38(21), 2153-2160. doi: 10.3109/09638288.2015.1114034
15. Kuorinka, I., Jonsson, B., Kilbom, A., Vinterberg, H., Biering-Sørensen, F., Andersson, G., et al. (1987). Standardised Nordic Questionnaires for the analysis of musculoskeletal symptoms. Appl Ergon, 18(3), 233-237. doi: 10.1016/0003-6870(87)90010-x
16. Laufer, Y., Hausdorff, J. M., & Ring, H. (2009). Effects of a foot drop neuroprosthesis on functional abilities, social participation, and gait velocity. Am J Phys Med Rehabil, 88(1), 14-20. doi: 10.1097/PHM.0b013e3181911246
17. Lundberg, M., Styf, J., & Jansson, B. (2009). On what patients does the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia fit? Physiother Theory Pract, 25(7), 495-506. doi: 10.3109/09593980802662160
18. Mell, A. G., Friedman, M. A., Hughes, R. E., & Carpenter, J. E. (2006). Shoulder muscle activity increases with wrist splint use during a simulated upper-extremity work task. Am J Occup Ther, 60(3), 320-326. doi: 10.5014/ajot.60.3.320
19. Miller, R. P., Kori, S. H., & Todd, D. D. (1991). The Tampa Scale: A measure of kinesiophobia. Clin J Pain, 7(1), 51-52.
20. Mills, K., Blanch, P., Chapman, A.R., McPoil, T. G., & Vicenzino, B. (2010). Foot orthoses and gait: A systematic review and meta-analysis of literature pertaining to potential mechanisms. Br J Sports Med, 44(14), 1035-1046. doi: 10.1136/bjsm.2009.066977
21. Muzin, S., Isaac, Z., Walker, J., El Abd, O., & Baima, J. (2008). When should a cervical collar be used to treat neck pain? Curr Rew Musculoskelet Med, 1(2), 114-119. doi: 10.1007/s12178-007-9017-9
22. Negrini, S., Grivas, T.B., Kotwicki, T., Rigo, M., & Zaina, F. (2009). Guidelines on" Standards of management of idiopathic scoliosis with corrective braces in everyday clinics and in clinical research": SOSORT Consensus 2008. Scoliosis, 4(1), 1-14. doi: 10.1186/1748-7161-4-2
23. Pool, J. J., Hiralal, S., Ostelo, R. W., Van der Veer, K., Vlaeyen, J. W., Bouter, L.M., et al. (2009). The applicability of the Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia for patients with sub-acute neck pain: a qualitative study. Qual Quant, 43(5), 773-780. doi 10.1007/s11135-008-9203-x
24. Priore, L. B., Lack, S., Garcia, C., Azevedo, F. M., & de Oliveira Silva, D. (2020). Two weeks of wearing a knee brace compared with minimal intervention on kinesiophobia at 2 and 6 weeks in people with patellofemoral pain: a randomized controlled trial. Arch of Phys Med Rehabil, 101(4), 613-623.
25. Rickert, C., Grabowski, M., Gosheger, G., Schorn, D., Schneider, K. N., Klingebiel, S., et al. (2020). How shoulder immobilization influences daily physical activity–an accelerometer based preliminary study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord, 21(1), 1-6. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2019.10.190
26. Saglam, M., Arikan, H., Savci, S., Inal-Ince, D., Bosnak-Guclu, M., Karabulut, E., et al. (2010). International Physical Activity Questionnaire: Reliability and validity of the Turkish version. Percept Mot Skills, 111(1), 278-284. doi: 10.2466/06.08.PMS.111.4.278-284
27. Sebastiao, E., Gobbi, S., Chodzko-Zajko, W., Schwingel, A., Papini, C., Nakamura, P., et al. (2012). The International Physical Activity Questionnaire-long form overestimates self-reported physical activity of Brazilian adults. Public Health, 126(11), 967-975. doi: 10.1016/j.puhe.2012.07.004
28. Sliepen, M., Mauricio, E., & Rosenbaum, D. (2018). Acute and mid-term (six-week) effects of an ankle-foot-orthosis on biomechanical parameters, clinical outcomes and physical activity in knee osteoarthritis patients with varus malalignment. Gait Posture, 62, 297-302. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2018.03.034
29. Telfer, S., Abbott, M., Steultjens, M., Rafferty, D., & Woodburn, J. (2013). Dose–response effects of customised foot orthoses on lower limb muscle activity and plantar pressures in pronated foot type. Gait Posture, 38(3), 443-449. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2013.01.012
30. Van Swigchem, R., Vloothuis, J., den Boer, J., Weerdesteyn, V., & Geurts, A.C. (2010). Is transcutaneous peroneal stimulation beneficial to patients with chronic stroke using an ankle-foot orthosis? A within-subjects study of patients' satisfaction, walking speed and physical activity level. J Rehabil Med, 42(2), 117-121.
31. Wang, C., Goel, R., Rahemi, H., Zhang, Q., Lepow, B., & Najafi, B. (2019). Effectiveness of daily use of bilateral custom-made ankle-foot orthoses on balance, fear of falling, and physical activity in older adults: a randomized controlled trial. Gerontology, 65(3), 299-307. doi: 10.2340/16501977-0489
32. Wanner, M., Probst-Hensch, N., Kriemler, S., Meier, F., Autenrieth, C., & Martin, B.W. (2016). Validation of the long international physical activity questionnaire: influence of age and language region. Prev Med Rep, 3, 250-256. doi:10.1016/j.pmedr.2016.03.003
33. Yilmaz, Ö.T., Yakut, Y., Uygur, F., & Uluğ, N. (2011). Tampa Kinezyofobi Ölçeği’nin Türkçe versiyonu ve test-tekrar test güvenirliği. Fiz Rehabil, 22(1), 44-49.
34. Zarghooni, K., Beyer, F., Siewe, J., & Eysel, P. (2013). The orthotic treatment of acute and chronic disease of the cervical and lumbar spine. Dtsch Arztebl Int, 110(44), 737-742. doi:10.3238/arztebl.2013.0737