Relationship Between Body Mass Index And Knee Alignment NJIRM 2014; Vol. 5(3).May- June eISSN: 0975-9840 pISSN: 2230 - 9969 33 Relationship between Body Mass Index And Knee Alignment Using Non-Radiographic / Umbilical Method Ukoha U. Ukoha*; Kosisochukwu E. Umeasalugo * ; Joseph I. Okafor ** ;Obioma C. Ejimofor * ; Henry C. Nzeakor * ;Uzozie C. Ofoego * ;Christian U. Oparaugo * * Department Of Anatomy, College Of Health Sciences, Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Nnewi, Nigeria ** Department of Human Anatomy, Anambra State University, Uli, Nigeria Abstracts: Aim: The aim of the research was to investigate the relationship between body mass index and knee alignment angle using non-radiographic methods, and to propose a regression equation to define the relationship.Method: A total of 300 students (200 males, 100 females) of Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Nnewi campus participated in the study. Knee alignment was measured using body landmarks (umbilicus, right knee and right second toe) with a goniometer and calliper; the body mass index was also determined.Result: The male subjects had a mean body mass index of 24.2 kg/m 2 and knee alignment angle of 176.5 o . The female participants had a mean body mass index of 22.7 kg/m 2 and knee alignment angle of 180.9 o . Body mass index had no significant relationship with knee alignment in both males and females respectively (r = 0.009, p > 0.05; r = 0.065, p > 0.05). Conclusion: The study showed no significant positive relationship between body mass index and knee alignment, and body mass index is therefore not a good determinant for the control of knee alignment-based knee osteoarthritis. [Ukoha U NJIRM 2014; 5(3):33-36] Key Words: Body mass index, knee alignment, knee osteoarthritis, correlation. Author for correspondence: Dr Ukoha Ukoha; Department of Anatomy, College of Health Sciences, Nnamdi Azikiwe University, P.M.B 5001, Nnewi, Nigeria. Ph: +2348034094264 ; Email : drukohaukoha@yahoo.com Introduction: Knee osteoarthritis is a leading cause of disability in older persons 0 and is a common disease affecting elderly individuals 0 so there is an increasing interest in understanding the incidence, progression and management of osteoarthritis 0 . Many factors are known to increase the risk of knee osteoarthritis of which body mass index and knee alignment are the two most important 0-0 . Studies suggest that the risk of knee osteoarthritis increases from exposure to a high body mass index through adulthood 0 . Knee alignment angle, a measure of mechanical axis, has been reported to correlate with severity and progression of knee osteoarthritis. Mechanical joint stress imposed by high body mass index is associated with increased risk of knee and hip osteoarthritis 0 . Evaluation of knee alignment is useful in the diagnosis of arthritic condition affecting the knee joint, serving also as a guide to conservative management and surgical planning. They are also fundamental to various aspect of musculoskeletal research. The gold standard radiographic method has been used as an accurate measure for knee alignment angle which involves long leg radiograph although this method has been met with few limitations such as cost, lack of availability to researchers and exposure to radiation 0 . There is therefore a need to employ a non-radiographic assessment for the knee alignment using umbilical methods which involves the use of body landmarks (umbilicus, knee and second toe). The non-radiographic measure of frontal plane has been reported to correlate with the gold standard radiography 0-0 . The purpose of this study is to investigate the relationship between knee alignment and body mass index and also to propose a regression equation to represent this relationship. Materials And Method: The Study Was Carried out in the gymnasium unit of the Department of Medical Rehabilitation, College of Health Sciences, Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Nnewi campus. Ethical approval was sought and obtained from the Ethical Committee of the Faculty of Basic Medical Sciences. Sample Size: Sample size was determined, using the formulae n=N/(1+N(e) 2 ) ǁheƌe Ŷ = ƌeƋuiƌed saŵple size, N = populatioŶ of studLJ, 1 = statistiĐal ĐoŶstaŶt, e = 0.05 (error of margin at 5%). With a student population of about 1000, the calculated sample size was 307.