Self-Report and Contemporaneously Recorded Running Agreement in Recreational Athletes.

ABSTRACT: Leech RD, Grunseit A, and Edwards KL. Self-report and contemporaneously recorded running agreement in recreational athletes. J Strength Cond Res 36(7): 1922-1929, 2022-Accurate assessment of running exposure in research or clinical practice relies on the ability to measure the behavior validly and reliably. Self-reported physical activity (PA) (including running), although commonly used, is subject to bias. User-owned wearable technological devices provide a potential contemporaneously collected data source for validating retrospective running-specific questionnaires. This study assesses agreement between self-reported running and contemporaneously collected running data. Self-reported running and corresponding contemporaneously recorded for current (at the time of questionnaire completion) and historical (6 months prior) was collected. Concordance Correlations and Bland-Altman Limits of Agreement measured extent of agreement. Categories for Metabolic Equivalent Task (MET) hours per week were calculated from total running distance. Unweighted and weighted Kappas were used to compare classification of levels of running by the 2 data sources. Running data were collected from 139 subjects (mean age 51.1 years). Self-report data were higher than contemporaneous data. Average estimated pace from both sources were similar, with high variance in some individuals. Differences of 43.5-57.1% were reported for current mean weekly running distances for 7-day, 4-week, and 12-week running periods. The level of agreement in classification between self-report and contemporaneous running data MET/HR categories was fair (unweighted K = 0.24-0.33) to moderate (weighted K = 0.46-0.63). Compared with contemporaneous running data, runners over-estimate the frequency, distance, and duration of running in self-report. Runners tend to discount nonrunning periods and unusual runs when estimating current and historical "average" running. The opportunities and limitations of different contemporaneous running data collection methods as a PA comparator must be acknowledged.

Lower extremity osteoarthritis: optimising musculoskeletal health is a growing global concern: a narrative review.

The burden of non-communicable diseases, such as osteoarthritis (OA), continues to increase for individuals and society. Regrettably, in many instances, healthcare professionals fail to manage OA optimally. There is growing disparity between the strength of evidence supporting interventions for OA and the frequency of their use in practice. Physical activity and exercise, weight management and education are key management components supported by evidence yet lack appropriate implementation. Furthermore, a recognition that treatment earlier in the disease process may halt progression or reverse structural changes has not been translated into clinical practice. We have largely failed to put pathways and procedures in place that promote a proactive approach to facilitate better outcomes in OA. This paper aims to highlight areas of evidence-based practical management that could improve patient outcomes if used more effectively.

Running and Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis (OA) is a chronic condition characterized by pain, impaired function, and reduced quality of life. A number of risk factors for knee OA have been identified, such as obesity, occupation, and injury. The association between knee OA and physical activity or particular sports such as running is less clear. Previous reviews, and the evidence that informs them, present contradictory or inconclusive findings. PURPOSE: This systematic review aimed to determine the association between running and the development of knee OA. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: Four electronic databases were searched, along with citations in eligible articles and reviews and the contents of recent journal issues. Two reviewers independently screened the titles and abstracts using prespecified eligibility criteria. Full-text articles were also independently assessed for eligibility. Eligible studies were those in which running or running-related sports (eg, triathlon or orienteering) were assessed as a risk factor for the onset or progression of knee OA in adults. Relevant outcomes included (1) diagnosis of knee OA, (2) radiographic markers of knee OA, (3) knee joint surgery for OA, (4) knee pain, and (5) knee-associated disability. Risk of bias was judged by use of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed with case-control studies investigating arthroplasty. RESULTS: After de-duplication, the search returned 1322 records. Of these, 153 full-text articles were assessed; 25 were eligible, describing 15 studies: 11 cohort (6 retrospective) and 4 case-control studies. Findings of studies with a diagnostic OA outcome were mixed. Some radiographic differences were observed in runners, but only at baseline within some subgroups. Meta-analysis suggested a protective effect of running against surgery due to OA: pooled odds ratio 0.46 (95% CI, 0.30-0.71). The I2 was 0% (95% CI, 0%-73%). Evidence relating to symptomatic outcomes was sparse and inconclusive. CONCLUSION: With this evidence, it is not possible to determine the role of running in knee OA. Moderate- to low-quality evidence suggests no association with OA diagnosis, a positive association with OA diagnosis, and a negative association with knee OA surgery. Conflicting results may reflect methodological heterogeneity. More evidence from well-designed, prospective studies is needed to clarify the contradictions.