PhysioHub

Clinimetric properties of the knee extension prone test (KEPT): a new method to assess knee hyperextension deficit

Our take

Is the knee extension prone test (KEPT) an accurate and consistent way to measure how much knee hyperextension is limited?

The KEPT is a valid and reliable low-cost method for assessing knee hyperextension deficit in both healthy people and those with a history of knee injury. It showed good to excellent reliability and moderate to good agreement with established measurement methods.

SupportsRead paper
Primary studyModerate evidence

Key points

  1. The KEPT is proposed as a low-cost, affordable alternative for measuring knee hyperextension deficit.
  2. Two examiners compared the KEPT against goniometry, inclinometry, and photogrammetry in healthy participants and participants with a history of knee injury.
  3. Reliability was good within the same examiner and excellent between different examiners.
  4. Validity against existing measurement methods ranged from moderate to good.
  5. Measurement error was small within one examiner but larger between examiners.

How it was conducted

Design
Clinimetric study of concurrent validity and reliability
Groups
Group 1, healthy participants; Group 2, participants with a history of knee injury
Examiners
Two examiners performing each evaluation
Comparison methods
Lateral knee goniometry, anterior tibial inclinometry, lateral photogrammetry in supine and prone
Statistics
Pearson correlation (r) for validity; intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for reliability

What they found

  • Intra-examiner reliability was good (ICC = 0.85, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.89).
  • Inter-examiner reliability was excellent (ICC = 0.92, 95% CI 0.88 to 0.94).
  • Standard error of measurement was 0.47 degrees intra-examiner and 1.30 degrees inter-examiner.
  • Minimum detectable change was 2.35 degrees intra-examiner and 6.5 degrees inter-examiner.
  • Concurrent validity ranged from moderate to good (r = 0.54 to 0.78, p < 0.01).

Limitations

  • Validity was only moderate at the lower end of the correlation range, so the KEPT does not perfectly match reference methods.
  • The exact total sample size and group sizes are not reported in the available text.
  • Between-examiner measurement error and minimum detectable change were notably larger than within-examiner values.
  • As a single clinimetric study, the findings need replication in broader populations and clinical settings.

Why it matters

For patients
If your clinician checks your knee hyperextension, the KEPT can give a consistent measurement without expensive equipment.
For clinicians
The KEPT offers a valid, reliable, low-cost option for assessing knee hyperextension deficit, with small within-examiner error but a larger 6.5 degree minimum detectable change when different examiners take measurements.
For readers
This study introduces and validates a new simple test rather than evaluating a treatment, supporting its use as a measurement tool.

Source

doi:10.1016/j.jbmt.2022.04.002

Read the original paper
Clinically assessing this area? See the knee special tests.

More Knee studies