Tibiofemoral joint positioning for the valgus stress test
Recommendations on the positioning of the tibiofemoral joint during a valgus stress test to optimize isolation of the medial collateral ligament (MCL) from other medial joint structures vary in the literature. If a specific amount of flexion could be identified as optimally isolating the MCL, teachi...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of athletic training 2010-07, Vol.45 (4), p.357-363 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 363 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 357 |
container_title | Journal of athletic training |
container_volume | 45 |
creator | Aronson, Patricia A Gieck, Joe H Hertel, Jay Rijke, Arie M Ingersoll, Christopher D |
description | Recommendations on the positioning of the tibiofemoral joint during a valgus stress test to optimize isolation of the medial collateral ligament (MCL) from other medial joint structures vary in the literature. If a specific amount of flexion could be identified as optimally isolating the MCL, teaching and using the technique would be more consistent in clinical application.
To determine the angle of tibiofemoral joint flexion between 0 degrees and 20 degrees that causes a difference in the slope of the force-strain line when measuring the resistance to a valgus force applied to the joint.
Cross-sectional study.
University research laboratory.
Twelve healthy volunteers (6 men, 6 women: age = 26.4 +/- 5.6 years, height = 170.9 +/- 8.4 cm, mass = 75.01 +/- 14.6 kg).
Using an arthrometer, we applied a valgus force, over a range of 60 N, to the tibiofemoral joint in 0 degrees , 5 degrees , 10 degrees , 15 degrees , and 20 degrees of flexion.
Force-strain measurements were obtained for 5 positions of tibiofemoral joint flexion.
As knee flexion angle increased, slope values decreased (F(4,44) = 17.6, P < .001). The slope at full extension was not different from that at 5 degrees of flexion, but it was different from the slopes at angles greater than 10 degrees of flexion. Similarly, the slope at 5 degrees of flexion was not different from that at 10 degrees of flexion, but it was different from the slopes at 15 degrees and 20 degrees of flexion. Further, the slope at 10 degrees of flexion was not different from that at 15 degrees or 20 degrees of flexion. Finally, the slope at 15 degrees of flexion was not different from that at 20 degrees of flexion.
When performing the manual valgus stress test, the clinician should fully extend the tibiofemoral joint or flex it to 5 degrees to assess all resisting medial tibiofemoral joint structures and again at 15 degrees to 20 degrees of joint flexion to further assess the MCL. |
doi_str_mv | 10.4085/1062-6050-45.4.357 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_2902029</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2092850051</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c460t-1f6ad5aabe1ca218c4693967bddbd617ae62ad1d1729d58a049d31f8f5b0fe2d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkUtLxDAYRYMovv-ACyluXHX88myyEUR8geBmBHchbdIxQ6cZk3bAf28GdVA3rhKS811uchA6wTBhIPkFBkFKARxKxidsQnm1hfaxorLEgrxs5_03sIcOUpoDYMKV2EV7BASuFIZ9pKa-9qF1ixBNV8yD74diGZIffOh9PyvaEIvh1RUr083GVKQhupSKwaXhCO20pkvu-Gs9RM-3N9Pr-_Lx6e7h-uqxbJiAocStMJYbUzvcGIJlPlVUiaq2tra5hXGCGIstroiyXBpgylLcypbX0Dpi6SG6_MxdjvXC2cb1Q66ql9EvTHzXwXj9-6b3r3oWVpooIEBUDjj_CojhbczN9cKnxnWd6V0Yk5ZcMsJEJf8lK0q5YhjTTJ79IedhjH3-B10RKQgBChkin1ATQ0rRtZvSGPTaoF4L0mtBmnHNdDaYh05_Pncz8q2MfgC3mZdl</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>728622030</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Tibiofemoral joint positioning for the valgus stress test</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><source>Free E- Journals</source><creator>Aronson, Patricia A ; Gieck, Joe H ; Hertel, Jay ; Rijke, Arie M ; Ingersoll, Christopher D</creator><creatorcontrib>Aronson, Patricia A ; Gieck, Joe H ; Hertel, Jay ; Rijke, Arie M ; Ingersoll, Christopher D</creatorcontrib><description>Recommendations on the positioning of the tibiofemoral joint during a valgus stress test to optimize isolation of the medial collateral ligament (MCL) from other medial joint structures vary in the literature. If a specific amount of flexion could be identified as optimally isolating the MCL, teaching and using the technique would be more consistent in clinical application.
To determine the angle of tibiofemoral joint flexion between 0 degrees and 20 degrees that causes a difference in the slope of the force-strain line when measuring the resistance to a valgus force applied to the joint.
Cross-sectional study.
University research laboratory.
Twelve healthy volunteers (6 men, 6 women: age = 26.4 +/- 5.6 years, height = 170.9 +/- 8.4 cm, mass = 75.01 +/- 14.6 kg).
Using an arthrometer, we applied a valgus force, over a range of 60 N, to the tibiofemoral joint in 0 degrees , 5 degrees , 10 degrees , 15 degrees , and 20 degrees of flexion.
Force-strain measurements were obtained for 5 positions of tibiofemoral joint flexion.
As knee flexion angle increased, slope values decreased (F(4,44) = 17.6, P < .001). The slope at full extension was not different from that at 5 degrees of flexion, but it was different from the slopes at angles greater than 10 degrees of flexion. Similarly, the slope at 5 degrees of flexion was not different from that at 10 degrees of flexion, but it was different from the slopes at 15 degrees and 20 degrees of flexion. Further, the slope at 10 degrees of flexion was not different from that at 15 degrees or 20 degrees of flexion. Finally, the slope at 15 degrees of flexion was not different from that at 20 degrees of flexion.
When performing the manual valgus stress test, the clinician should fully extend the tibiofemoral joint or flex it to 5 degrees to assess all resisting medial tibiofemoral joint structures and again at 15 degrees to 20 degrees of joint flexion to further assess the MCL.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1062-6050</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1938-162X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.4085/1062-6050-45.4.357</identifier><identifier>PMID: 20617910</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: National Athletic Trainers Association</publisher><subject>Adult ; Analysis of Variance ; Arthrometry, Articular ; Biomechanical Phenomena ; Clinical medicine ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; Electromyography ; Equipment Design ; Female ; Femur - physiology ; Grading ; Humans ; Injuries ; Knee ; Knee Joint - physiology ; Male ; Measurement Techniques ; Medial Collateral Ligament, Knee - physiology ; Original Research ; Outcome Measures ; Patient Positioning ; Posture - physiology ; Predictor Variables ; Range of Motion, Articular - physiology ; Sports medicine ; Stress, Mechanical ; Studies ; Teaching Methods ; Tibia - physiology</subject><ispartof>Journal of athletic training, 2010-07, Vol.45 (4), p.357-363</ispartof><rights>Copyright National Athletic Trainers Association Jul/Aug 2010</rights><rights>the National Athletic Trainers' Association, Inc 2010</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c460t-1f6ad5aabe1ca218c4693967bddbd617ae62ad1d1729d58a049d31f8f5b0fe2d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c460t-1f6ad5aabe1ca218c4693967bddbd617ae62ad1d1729d58a049d31f8f5b0fe2d3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2902029/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2902029/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,27924,27925,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20617910$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Aronson, Patricia A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gieck, Joe H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hertel, Jay</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rijke, Arie M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ingersoll, Christopher D</creatorcontrib><title>Tibiofemoral joint positioning for the valgus stress test</title><title>Journal of athletic training</title><addtitle>J Athl Train</addtitle><description>Recommendations on the positioning of the tibiofemoral joint during a valgus stress test to optimize isolation of the medial collateral ligament (MCL) from other medial joint structures vary in the literature. If a specific amount of flexion could be identified as optimally isolating the MCL, teaching and using the technique would be more consistent in clinical application.
To determine the angle of tibiofemoral joint flexion between 0 degrees and 20 degrees that causes a difference in the slope of the force-strain line when measuring the resistance to a valgus force applied to the joint.
Cross-sectional study.
University research laboratory.
Twelve healthy volunteers (6 men, 6 women: age = 26.4 +/- 5.6 years, height = 170.9 +/- 8.4 cm, mass = 75.01 +/- 14.6 kg).
Using an arthrometer, we applied a valgus force, over a range of 60 N, to the tibiofemoral joint in 0 degrees , 5 degrees , 10 degrees , 15 degrees , and 20 degrees of flexion.
Force-strain measurements were obtained for 5 positions of tibiofemoral joint flexion.
As knee flexion angle increased, slope values decreased (F(4,44) = 17.6, P < .001). The slope at full extension was not different from that at 5 degrees of flexion, but it was different from the slopes at angles greater than 10 degrees of flexion. Similarly, the slope at 5 degrees of flexion was not different from that at 10 degrees of flexion, but it was different from the slopes at 15 degrees and 20 degrees of flexion. Further, the slope at 10 degrees of flexion was not different from that at 15 degrees or 20 degrees of flexion. Finally, the slope at 15 degrees of flexion was not different from that at 20 degrees of flexion.
When performing the manual valgus stress test, the clinician should fully extend the tibiofemoral joint or flex it to 5 degrees to assess all resisting medial tibiofemoral joint structures and again at 15 degrees to 20 degrees of joint flexion to further assess the MCL.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Analysis of Variance</subject><subject>Arthrometry, Articular</subject><subject>Biomechanical Phenomena</subject><subject>Clinical medicine</subject><subject>Cross-Sectional Studies</subject><subject>Electromyography</subject><subject>Equipment Design</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Femur - physiology</subject><subject>Grading</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Injuries</subject><subject>Knee</subject><subject>Knee Joint - physiology</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Measurement Techniques</subject><subject>Medial Collateral Ligament, Knee - physiology</subject><subject>Original Research</subject><subject>Outcome Measures</subject><subject>Patient Positioning</subject><subject>Posture - physiology</subject><subject>Predictor Variables</subject><subject>Range of Motion, Articular - physiology</subject><subject>Sports medicine</subject><subject>Stress, Mechanical</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Teaching Methods</subject><subject>Tibia - physiology</subject><issn>1062-6050</issn><issn>1938-162X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2010</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkUtLxDAYRYMovv-ACyluXHX88myyEUR8geBmBHchbdIxQ6cZk3bAf28GdVA3rhKS811uchA6wTBhIPkFBkFKARxKxidsQnm1hfaxorLEgrxs5_03sIcOUpoDYMKV2EV7BASuFIZ9pKa-9qF1ixBNV8yD74diGZIffOh9PyvaEIvh1RUr083GVKQhupSKwaXhCO20pkvu-Gs9RM-3N9Pr-_Lx6e7h-uqxbJiAocStMJYbUzvcGIJlPlVUiaq2tra5hXGCGIstroiyXBpgylLcypbX0Dpi6SG6_MxdjvXC2cb1Q66ql9EvTHzXwXj9-6b3r3oWVpooIEBUDjj_CojhbczN9cKnxnWd6V0Yk5ZcMsJEJf8lK0q5YhjTTJ79IedhjH3-B10RKQgBChkin1ATQ0rRtZvSGPTaoF4L0mtBmnHNdDaYh05_Pncz8q2MfgC3mZdl</recordid><startdate>20100701</startdate><enddate>20100701</enddate><creator>Aronson, Patricia A</creator><creator>Gieck, Joe H</creator><creator>Hertel, Jay</creator><creator>Rijke, Arie M</creator><creator>Ingersoll, Christopher D</creator><general>National Athletic Trainers Association</general><general>The National Athletic Trainers' Association, Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7TS</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>8A4</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K9-</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M0R</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20100701</creationdate><title>Tibiofemoral joint positioning for the valgus stress test</title><author>Aronson, Patricia A ; Gieck, Joe H ; Hertel, Jay ; Rijke, Arie M ; Ingersoll, Christopher D</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c460t-1f6ad5aabe1ca218c4693967bddbd617ae62ad1d1729d58a049d31f8f5b0fe2d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2010</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Analysis of Variance</topic><topic>Arthrometry, Articular</topic><topic>Biomechanical Phenomena</topic><topic>Clinical medicine</topic><topic>Cross-Sectional Studies</topic><topic>Electromyography</topic><topic>Equipment Design</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Femur - physiology</topic><topic>Grading</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Injuries</topic><topic>Knee</topic><topic>Knee Joint - physiology</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Measurement Techniques</topic><topic>Medial Collateral Ligament, Knee - physiology</topic><topic>Original Research</topic><topic>Outcome Measures</topic><topic>Patient Positioning</topic><topic>Posture - physiology</topic><topic>Predictor Variables</topic><topic>Range of Motion, Articular - physiology</topic><topic>Sports medicine</topic><topic>Stress, Mechanical</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Teaching Methods</topic><topic>Tibia - physiology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Aronson, Patricia A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gieck, Joe H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hertel, Jay</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rijke, Arie M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ingersoll, Christopher D</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Physical Education Index</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Education Periodicals</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>eLibrary</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>Consumer Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Education Database</collection><collection>Consumer Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Psychology Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of athletic training</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Aronson, Patricia A</au><au>Gieck, Joe H</au><au>Hertel, Jay</au><au>Rijke, Arie M</au><au>Ingersoll, Christopher D</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Tibiofemoral joint positioning for the valgus stress test</atitle><jtitle>Journal of athletic training</jtitle><addtitle>J Athl Train</addtitle><date>2010-07-01</date><risdate>2010</risdate><volume>45</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>357</spage><epage>363</epage><pages>357-363</pages><issn>1062-6050</issn><eissn>1938-162X</eissn><abstract>Recommendations on the positioning of the tibiofemoral joint during a valgus stress test to optimize isolation of the medial collateral ligament (MCL) from other medial joint structures vary in the literature. If a specific amount of flexion could be identified as optimally isolating the MCL, teaching and using the technique would be more consistent in clinical application.
To determine the angle of tibiofemoral joint flexion between 0 degrees and 20 degrees that causes a difference in the slope of the force-strain line when measuring the resistance to a valgus force applied to the joint.
Cross-sectional study.
University research laboratory.
Twelve healthy volunteers (6 men, 6 women: age = 26.4 +/- 5.6 years, height = 170.9 +/- 8.4 cm, mass = 75.01 +/- 14.6 kg).
Using an arthrometer, we applied a valgus force, over a range of 60 N, to the tibiofemoral joint in 0 degrees , 5 degrees , 10 degrees , 15 degrees , and 20 degrees of flexion.
Force-strain measurements were obtained for 5 positions of tibiofemoral joint flexion.
As knee flexion angle increased, slope values decreased (F(4,44) = 17.6, P < .001). The slope at full extension was not different from that at 5 degrees of flexion, but it was different from the slopes at angles greater than 10 degrees of flexion. Similarly, the slope at 5 degrees of flexion was not different from that at 10 degrees of flexion, but it was different from the slopes at 15 degrees and 20 degrees of flexion. Further, the slope at 10 degrees of flexion was not different from that at 15 degrees or 20 degrees of flexion. Finally, the slope at 15 degrees of flexion was not different from that at 20 degrees of flexion.
When performing the manual valgus stress test, the clinician should fully extend the tibiofemoral joint or flex it to 5 degrees to assess all resisting medial tibiofemoral joint structures and again at 15 degrees to 20 degrees of joint flexion to further assess the MCL.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>National Athletic Trainers Association</pub><pmid>20617910</pmid><doi>10.4085/1062-6050-45.4.357</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1062-6050 |
ispartof | Journal of athletic training, 2010-07, Vol.45 (4), p.357-363 |
issn | 1062-6050 1938-162X |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_2902029 |
source | MEDLINE; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central; Alma/SFX Local Collection; Free E- Journals |
subjects | Adult Analysis of Variance Arthrometry, Articular Biomechanical Phenomena Clinical medicine Cross-Sectional Studies Electromyography Equipment Design Female Femur - physiology Grading Humans Injuries Knee Knee Joint - physiology Male Measurement Techniques Medial Collateral Ligament, Knee - physiology Original Research Outcome Measures Patient Positioning Posture - physiology Predictor Variables Range of Motion, Articular - physiology Sports medicine Stress, Mechanical Studies Teaching Methods Tibia - physiology |
title | Tibiofemoral joint positioning for the valgus stress test |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-04T22%3A44%3A01IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Tibiofemoral%20joint%20positioning%20for%20the%20valgus%20stress%20test&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20athletic%20training&rft.au=Aronson,%20Patricia%20A&rft.date=2010-07-01&rft.volume=45&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=357&rft.epage=363&rft.pages=357-363&rft.issn=1062-6050&rft.eissn=1938-162X&rft_id=info:doi/10.4085/1062-6050-45.4.357&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2092850051%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=728622030&rft_id=info:pmid/20617910&rfr_iscdi=true |