30‐sit‐to‐stand power is a better tool than isometric knee extensor strength to detect motor impairment in people with haemophilic arthropathy

Abstract

AbstractIntroductionRegular assessment of motor impairments is crucial in people with haemophilic arthropathy (PwHA). This study aimed to determine if there are differences in 30‐seconds sit‐to‐stand (30‐STS) power and maximal voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) of the knee extensors between PwHA and healthy control group (CG). The secondary aims were to investigate the correlation between 30‐STS power and MVIC of knee extensors with clinical characteristics and to assess their effectiveness in identifying motor impairment in PwHA.MethodsA cross‐sectional study was conducted by collecting data from PwHA (n = 17) and a sedentary CG (n = 15). MVIC (torque) and 30‐STS power were normalised to body mass. Correlation analysis and simple linear regression adjusted for age were used to assess the association between tests and clinical variables. Using z‐scores derived from the mean and standard deviation of the CG, we compared the MVIC and the 30‐STS power in PwHA.ResultsPwHA showed lower MVIC and 30‐STS power compared to CG (p < .001; large effect size d > .8). Lower 30‐STS power was associated with greater joint impairment and greater fear of movement, whereas MVIC showed no association with clinical variables. 30‐STS power showed a lower z‐score compared to MVIC (p < .001). In addition, 30‐STS power detected 47% of PwHA with motor impairment compared to 0% for MVIC (p = .002).ConclusionsOur results suggest that 30‐STS power may be more effective than knee extensors MVIC in detecting motor impairment in PwHA. Consequently, lower limb skeletal muscle power, rather than maximum knee extensor strength, appears to be more affected in PwHA.