BACKGROUND: Instrumented knee laxity testing devices have been used in both the clinical and research setting to evaluate persons with injuries about the knee. The ability to accurately and reproducibly quantify knee motion has the potential to greatly benefit both clinical practice and research by improving the validity of the research involving treatment of knee-ligament injuries. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: A thorough literature review was performed, and a systematic overview is provided evaluating the methods of use and the evidence for the use of instrumented knee laxity testing devices. RESULTS: Devices that provide measurements of knee laxity have evolved during the past 30 years. The authors describe in detail their proper use and the best estimates of their validity based on clinical studies. CONCLUSION: The review suggests that the KT-1000 knee arthrometer and the Rolimeter provide best results when testing anterior laxity at the knee, whereas the Telos device is superior for the assessment of posterior laxity.
BACKGROUND: Instrumented knee laxity testing devices have been used in both the clinical and research setting to evaluate persons with injuries about the knee. The ability to accurately and reproducibly quantify knee motion has the potential to greatly benefit both clinical practice and research by improving the validity of the research involving treatment of knee-ligament injuries. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: A thorough literature review was performed, and a systematic overview is provided evaluating the methods of use and the evidence for the use of instrumented knee laxity testing devices. RESULTS: Devices that provide measurements of knee laxity have evolved during the past 30 years. The authors describe in detail their proper use and the best estimates of their validity based on clinical studies. CONCLUSION: The review suggests that the KT-1000 knee arthrometer and the Rolimeter provide best results when testing anterior laxity at the knee, whereas the Telos device is superior for the assessment of posterior laxity.
Authors: Pierre Ranger; Alexandre Renaud; Philippe Phan; Philippe Dahan; Eros De Oliveira; Josee Delisle Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2010-11-24 Impact factor: 3.075
Authors: Lars Engebretsen; May Arna Risberg; Ben Robertson; Tom C Ludvigsen; Steinar Johansen Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2009-07-16 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Jürgen Höher; Ralph Akoto; Philip Helm; Sven Shafizadeh; Bertil Bouillon; Maurice Balke Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2014-02-23 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Kyoung-Tak Kang; Sung-Hwan Kim; Juhyun Son; Young Han Lee; Heoung-Jae Chun Journal: J Mater Sci Mater Med Date: 2016-10-27 Impact factor: 3.896
Authors: Carola F van Eck; Miette Loopik; Michel P van den Bekerom; Freddie H Fu; Gino M M J Kerkhoffs Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2012-10-17 Impact factor: 4.342