Luke G Perraton1,2, Michelle Hall3, Ross A Clark4, Kay M Crossley5, Yong-Hao Pua6, Tim S Whitehead7, Hayden G Morris8, Adam G Culvenor5,9, Adam L Bryant3. 1. Department of Physiotherapy, School of Primary Health Care, Monash University, Building B, McMahons Road, Peninsula campus, Frankston, VIC, 3199, Australia. luke.perraton@monash.edu. 2. Melbourne School of Physiotherapy, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia. luke.perraton@monash.edu. 3. Melbourne School of Physiotherapy, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia. 4. School of Health and Sport Sciences, University of the Sunshine Coast, Sippy Downs, Australia. 5. School of Allied Health, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Australia. 6. Department of Physiotherapy, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore. 7. Orthosport Victoria, Epworth Hospital, Melbourne, Australia. 8. The Park Clinic, Melbourne, Australia. 9. Institute of Anatomy Salzburg and Nuremburg, Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, Austria.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Poor knee function after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) may increase the risk of future knee symptoms and knee osteoarthritis via abnormal knee joint loading patterns, particularly during high-impact activity. This study aimed to assess the relationship between poor self-reported or clinically measured knee function and knee moments/vertical ground reaction force (vGRF) in individuals following ACLR. METHODS: 61 participants (mean 16.5 ± 3 months following ACLR, 23 women) completed a patient-reported knee function questionnaire and three hop tests (% of uninvolved limb). Participants were divided into satisfactory and poor knee function groups (poor < 85% patient-reported knee function and/or < 85% hop test symmetry). The knee biomechanics of both groups were assessed with three-dimensional motion analysis during the stance phase of overland running at self-selected speeds, and the association between knee function and knee moments was assessed using analysis of covariance with running speed as a covariate. RESULTS: Participants with poor knee function (n = 30) ran with significantly smaller peak knee flexion moments (moderate effect size 0.7, p = 0.03) and significantly smaller peak vGRFs (large effect size 1.0, p = 0.002) compared to those with satisfactory knee function (n = 31). No significant differences were observed for knee adduction and knee external rotation moments or knee kinematics. CONCLUSION: Individuals following ACLR with poor self-reported knee function and/or hop test performance demonstrate knee moments during running that may be associated with lower knee joint contact forces. These findings provide greater understanding of the relationship between knee biomechanics during running and clinical assessments of knee function. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III. Cross-sectional study.
PURPOSE: Poor knee function after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) may increase the risk of future knee symptoms and knee osteoarthritis via abnormal knee joint loading patterns, particularly during high-impact activity. This study aimed to assess the relationship between poor self-reported or clinically measured knee function and knee moments/vertical ground reaction force (vGRF) in individuals following ACLR. METHODS: 61 participants (mean 16.5 ± 3 months following ACLR, 23 women) completed a patient-reported knee function questionnaire and three hop tests (% of uninvolved limb). Participants were divided into satisfactory and poor knee function groups (poor < 85% patient-reported knee function and/or < 85% hop test symmetry). The knee biomechanics of both groups were assessed with three-dimensional motion analysis during the stance phase of overland running at self-selected speeds, and the association between knee function and knee moments was assessed using analysis of covariance with running speed as a covariate. RESULTS:Participants with poor knee function (n = 30) ran with significantly smaller peak knee flexion moments (moderate effect size 0.7, p = 0.03) and significantly smaller peak vGRFs (large effect size 1.0, p = 0.002) compared to those with satisfactory knee function (n = 31). No significant differences were observed for knee adduction and knee external rotation moments or knee kinematics. CONCLUSION: Individuals following ACLR with poor self-reported knee function and/or hop test performance demonstrate knee moments during running that may be associated with lower knee joint contact forces. These findings provide greater understanding of the relationship between knee biomechanics during running and clinical assessments of knee function. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III. Cross-sectional study.
Entities:
Keywords:
ACL reconstruction; Biomechanics; Hop tests; Patient-reported knee function; Running
Authors: T S Keller; A M Weisberger; J L Ray; S S Hasan; R G Shiavi; D M Spengler Journal: Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) Date: 1996-07 Impact factor: 2.063
Authors: D Vermesan; R Prejbeanu; S Laitin; V Georgianu; H Haragus; S Nitescu; M Tatullo; M Tattoli; M Caprio; R Cagiano Journal: Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci Date: 2014 Impact factor: 3.507
Authors: Stephanie R Filbay; Ilana N Ackerman; Trevor G Russell; Erin M Macri; Kay M Crossley Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2013-12-06 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Laura C Schmitt; Mark V Paterno; Kevin R Ford; Gregory D Myer; Timothy E Hewett Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2015-07 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Michelle Hall; Adam L Bryant; Tim V Wrigley; Clare Pratt; Kay M Crossley; Tim S Whitehead; Hayden G Morris; Ross A Clark; Luke G Perraton Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2015-12-14 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Geoffrey D Abrams; Joshua D Harris; Anil K Gupta; Frank M McCormick; Charles A Bush-Joseph; Nikhil N Verma; Brian J Cole; Bernard R Bach Journal: Orthop J Sports Med Date: 2014-01-21
Authors: Kelsey Neal; Jack R Williams; Abdulmajeed Alfayyadh; Jacob J Capin; Ashutosh Khandha; Kurt Manal; Lynn Snyder-Mackler; Thomas S Buchanan Journal: J Orthop Res Date: 2022-01-06 Impact factor: 3.102
Authors: Benoit Pairot-de-Fontenay; Richard W Willy; Audrey R C Elias; Ryan L Mizner; Marc-Olivier Dubé; Jean-Sébastien Roy Journal: Sports Med Date: 2019-09 Impact factor: 11.136
Authors: Yu-Lun Huang; Eunwook Chang; Samuel T Johnson; Christine D Pollard; Mark A Hoffman; Marc F Norcross Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-10-13 Impact factor: 3.390