Literature DB >> 18192493

A randomized controlled trial comparing the effectiveness of functional knee brace and neoprene sleeve use after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Trevor B Birmingham1, Dianne M Bryant, J Robert Giffin, Robert B Litchfield, John F Kramer, Allan Donner, Peter J Fowler.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Despite a lack of evidence for their effectiveness, functional knee braces are commonly prescribed to patients after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.
PURPOSE: This trial was conducted to compare postoperative outcomes in patients using an ACL functional knee brace and patients using a neoprene knee sleeve. HYPOTHESIS: Patients using a brace will have superior outcomes than those using a sleeve. STUDY
DESIGN: Randomized controlled clinical trial; Level of evidence, 1.
METHODS: One hundred fifty patients were randomized to receive a brace (n = 76) or neoprene sleeve (n = 74) at their 6-week postoperative visit after primary ACL reconstruction with hamstring autograft. Patients were assessed preoperatively, then 6 weeks and 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Outcome measures included disease-specific quality of life (Anterior Cruciate Ligament-Quality of Life [ACL-QOL] Questionnaire), anterior tibial translation (KT-1000 arthrometer side-to-side difference), the single-limb forward hop test (limb symmetry index), and Tegner Activity Scale. Outcomes at 1 and 2 years were compared after adjusting for baseline scores. Subjective ratings of how patients felt while using the brace/sleeve were also collected for descriptive purposes using a questionnaire. Four a priori directional subgroup hypotheses were evaluated using tests for interactions.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences between brace (n = 62) and sleeve (n = 65) groups for any of the outcomes at 1- and 2-year follow-ups. Adjusted mean differences at 2 years were as follows: -0.94 (95% confidence interval [CI], -7.52 to 5.64) for the ACL-QOL Questionnaire, -0.10 mm (95% CI, -0.99 to 0.81) for KT-1000 arthrometer side-to-side difference, -0.87% (95% CI, -8.89 to 7.12) for hop limb symmetry index, and -0.05 (95% CI, -0.72 to 0.62) for the Tegner Activity Scale. Subjective ratings of confidence in the knee provided by the brace/sleeve were higher for the brace group than the sleeve group. Subgroup findings were minimal. Adverse events were few and similar between groups.
CONCLUSIONS: A functional knee brace does not result in superior outcomes compared with a neoprene sleeve after ACL reconstruction. Current evidence does not support the recommendation of using an ACL functional knee brace after ACL reconstruction.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18192493     DOI: 10.1177/0363546507311601

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Sports Med        ISSN: 0363-5465            Impact factor:   6.202


  21 in total

1.  Brace or no-brace after ACL graft? Four-year results of a prospective clinical trial.

Authors:  Hermann O Mayr; Paul Stüeken; Ernst-Otto Münch; Morris Wolter; Anke Bernstein; Norbert P Suedkamp; Amelie Stoehr
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2013-06-27       Impact factor: 4.342

2.  Reliability of tunnel angle in ACL reconstruction: two-dimensional versus three-dimensional guide technique.

Authors:  Jeff R S Leiter; Nevin de Korompay; Lindsey Macdonald; Sheila McRae; Warren Froese; Peter B Macdonald
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2011-02-03       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 3.  Rehabilitation after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review.

Authors:  L M Kruse; B Gray; R W Wright
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2012-10-03       Impact factor: 5.284

Review 4.  Principles of postoperative anterior cruciate ligament rehabilitation.

Authors:  Tolga Saka
Journal:  World J Orthop       Date:  2014-09-18

5.  Knee stability and movement coordination impairments: knee ligament sprain.

Authors:  David S Logerstedt; Lynn Snyder-Mackler; Richard C Ritter; Michael J Axe; Joseph J Godges
Journal:  J Orthop Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 4.751

Review 6.  [Rupture of the anterior cruciate ligament. Diagnostics and therapy].

Authors:  W Teske; A Anastisiadis; T Lichtinger; C von Schulze Pellengahr; L V von Engelhardt; T Theodoridis
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 1.087

7.  Rehabilitation Predictors of Clinical Outcome Following Revision ACL Reconstruction in the MARS Cohort.

Authors: 
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2019-05-01       Impact factor: 5.284

8.  Avoid post operative bracing to reduce ACL rerupture rates.

Authors:  Arjun Ajith Naik; Bishwaranjan Das; Yogeesh D Kamat
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2019-07-26

Review 9.  Functional bracing of ACL injuries: current state and future directions.

Authors:  Sean D Smith; Robert F Laprade; Kyle S Jansson; Asbjørn Arøen; Coen A Wijdicks
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2013-04-27       Impact factor: 4.342

10.  Current practice variations in the management of anterior cruciate ligament injuries in Croatia.

Authors:  Alan Mahnik; Silvija Mahnik; Damjan Dimnjakovic; Stjepan Curic; Tomislav Smoljanovic; Ivan Bojanic
Journal:  World J Orthop       Date:  2013-10-18
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.