ArticleKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2021
The heel-rise work test overestimates the performed work with 21-25% after an Achilles tendon rupture.
Article in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Discordance Between Patient-Reported Outcomes and Heel-Rise Limb Symmetry After Surgical Repair of Acute Achilles Tendon Rupture.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Reliability and validity of two-dimensional motion capture to assess ankle dorsiflexion motion and heel raise work.Physical therapy in sport : official journal of the Association of Chartered Physiotherapists in Sports Medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study was to evaluate concurrent validity of the heel-rise work test performed with use of the heel as a surrogate for the center of body mass.
methodsThe study was a validity study performed on a prospective cohort of consecutive patients. Forty-five patients were included in the study. The heel-rise work test estimates the total work performed by repeated heel-rises until fatigue. In this study, the heel-rise work was assessed by the linear encoder and a motion capture system simultaneously for validation. The linear encoder was attached to the patient's heel and reflective marker was attached to the pelvis and heel. Student's paired t-test, linear regression analysis and Bland Altman plots were used to estimate the measurement error of the linear encoder.
resultsThe heel-rise work test overestimated the total work with 21.0% on the injured leg and 24.7% on the non-injured leg. Student's paired t-test showed no difference in measurement error between the limbs (n.s.). The linear regression analysis showed no difference in limb symmetry index between the two methods of heel-rise work estimation (a (slope) = 1.00, R = 0.94, p < 0.0001).
conclusionThe heel-rise work test performed using the heel as a surrogate for center of body mass overestimates the total work with 21.0-24.7% compared to a gold standard but was able to precisely detect the relative difference between the limbs. The heel marker can be considered a valid measurement device for assessing relative differences between the limbs. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Clinical testing of injuries to the lower body using the heel-rise work test is valid when using the relative difference between the limbs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33236164What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.