Wouter Welling1, Anne Benjaminse2, Koen Lemmink3, Alli Gokeler4. 1. University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Center for Human Movement Science, Antonius Deusinglaan 1, 9713 AV Groningen, the Netherlands; Medisch Centrum Zuid, Sportlaan 2-1, 9728 PH Groningen, the Netherlands. Electronic address: wouter.welling@mcz.nl. 2. University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Center for Human Movement Science, Antonius Deusinglaan 1, 9713 AV Groningen, the Netherlands; School of Sport Studies, Hanze University Groningen, Zernikeplein 17, 9747 AS Groningen, the Netherlands. 3. University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Center for Human Movement Science, Antonius Deusinglaan 1, 9713 AV Groningen, the Netherlands. 4. University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Center for Human Movement Science, Antonius Deusinglaan 1, 9713 AV Groningen, the Netherlands; Exercise Science and Neuroscience, Department Exercise & Health, Faculty of Science, Paderborn University, Paderborn, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A limited number of patients return to sport (RTS) after an anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) and patients who RTS have a relatively high risk for second ACL injury. The purpose of the current study was to compare the results of a test battery between patients who returned to the pre-injury level of sport (RTS group) and patients who did not (NO-RTS group). It was hypothesized that the RTS group showed better test results. METHODS: Sixty-four patients (age 27.8 ± 8.8 years) were included. The results of a multicomponent test battery (jump-landing task assessed with the Landing Error Scoring System (LESS), three hop tests, isokinetic strength test for quadriceps and hamstring) were compared between groups with a 2 × 2 ANOVA. RESULTS: The RTS group showed a significantly lower LESS score (p = 0.010), significantly higher absolute scores on hop tests with both legs (injured leg: single leg hop test p = 0.013, triple leg hop test p = 0.024, side hop test p = 0.021; non-injured leg: single leg hop test p = 0.011, triple leg hop test p = 0.023, side hop test p = 0.032) and significantly greater hamstring strength in the injured leg (p = 0.009 at 60°/s, p = 0.012 at 180°/s and p = 0.013 at 300°/s). No differences in test results were identified between patients who sustained a second ACL injury and patients who did not. CONCLUSION: Patients after ACLR with better jump-landing patterns, hop performance and greater hamstring strength have greater likelihood for RTS. However, our findings show that RTS criteria fail to identify patients who are at risk for a second ACL injury.
BACKGROUND: A limited number of patients return to sport (RTS) after an anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) and patients who RTS have a relatively high risk for second ACL injury. The purpose of the current study was to compare the results of a test battery between patients who returned to the pre-injury level of sport (RTS group) and patients who did not (NO-RTS group). It was hypothesized that the RTS group showed better test results. METHODS: Sixty-four patients (age 27.8 ± 8.8 years) were included. The results of a multicomponent test battery (jump-landing task assessed with the Landing Error Scoring System (LESS), three hop tests, isokinetic strength test for quadriceps and hamstring) were compared between groups with a 2 × 2 ANOVA. RESULTS: The RTS group showed a significantly lower LESS score (p = 0.010), significantly higher absolute scores on hop tests with both legs (injured leg: single leg hop test p = 0.013, triple leg hop test p = 0.024, side hop test p = 0.021; non-injured leg: single leg hop test p = 0.011, triple leg hop test p = 0.023, side hop test p = 0.032) and significantly greater hamstring strength in the injured leg (p = 0.009 at 60°/s, p = 0.012 at 180°/s and p = 0.013 at 300°/s). No differences in test results were identified between patients who sustained a second ACL injury and patients who did not. CONCLUSION:Patients after ACLR with better jump-landing patterns, hop performance and greater hamstring strength have greater likelihood for RTS. However, our findings show that RTS criteria fail to identify patients who are at risk for a second ACL injury.
Authors: Meredith Chaput; Marcus Palimenio; Brooke Farmer; Dimitrios Katsavelis; Jennifer J Bagwell; Kimberly A Turman; Chris Wichman; Terry L Grindstaff Journal: Int J Sports Phys Ther Date: 2021-02-01
Authors: Rhys Hughes; Matt Cross; Keith Stokes; Daniel Tobin; Eoin Power; Steph McNally; Jonathan Pamment Journal: BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med Date: 2021-10-19