Kinematics and kinetics of people who are hypermobile. A systematic review
Abstract
There are many studies investigating movement in individuals with hypermobile joints such that it is timely to systematically review the literature. This review concerns studies of lower limb tasks that compared kinematics and kinetics of hypermobile people with healthy controls. Its aims were to determine the quality of research completed so far and to collate what information is available regarding these factors in order to identify gaps in knowledge and provide direction for future research. A systematic search of AMED, CINAHL, Embase and MEDLINE databases alongside hand searching identified six articles fulfilling the selection criteria. Quality was evaluated using a modified Downs & Black [1] 'Quality Index' checklist and data extraction undertaken. All six articles investigated gait. Two rated as low quality and four as moderate quality. One study was omitted from data extraction to avoid a possible duplication of results. Of the remaining studies, three investigated Generalised Joint Hypermobility and two investigated Joint Hypermobility Syndrome. Sixty seven different outcome measures were used across the studies to quantify differences in gait, and these are summarised. For some of the common factors studied, conflicting findings were reported. There is no convincing evidence that hypermobile gait differs from normal in a consistent manner, and in addition, confounding factors such as pain have not been addressed. Data-dredging may have been an issue in the reviewed articles, and future research would benefit by linking outcome measures to clinically relevant factors. There is a lack of research into any task other than gait.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Patients with HSDs appear to lack proprioceptive acuity, which may increase risk of injury due to difficulty judging joint position.
“Patients with HSDs appear to lack proprioceptive acuity, which may increase risk of injury due to difficulty judging joint position.[26]”
From Hypermobility spectrum disorders: A review (2023) · cites this paper as [26]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 31 · Cited by 26
- Authors
- Bates, A. V., & Alexander, C. M.
- Affiliations
- Imperial College London (GB)
- Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Bates, Alexander V.
- Venue
- Gait & Posture
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2015-02
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 361-369
- ISSN
- 0966-6362 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2167953940
- Cited by
- 26
- References
- 31
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 0.08
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Gait & Posture (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Imperial College Healthcare Charity
- National Institute of Health Research
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Lower Extremity Biomechanics and Pathologies
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Connective tissue disorders research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
- Keywords
- joint hypermobility, generalized joint hypermobility, joint hypermobility syndrome, gait, lower limb kinematics, lower limb kinetics, research quality, outcome measures
- MeSH terms
- Biomechanical Phenomena, Gait, Humans, Joint Instability, Kinetics, Lower Extremity
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review