Are inter-limb differences in change of direction velocity and angle associated with inter-limb differences in kinematics and kinetics following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction?

BACKGROUND: Quantifying inter-limb differences in kinematics and kinetics during change of direction is proposed as a means of monitoring rehabilitation following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Velocity and centre of mass (CoM) deflection angle are fundamental task descriptors that influence kinematics and kinetics during change of direction. Inter-limb differences in approach velocity and CoM deflection angle have been identified following ACLR and may contribute to the presence of inter-limb differences in kinematics and kinetics during change of direction. RESEARCH QUESTION: The aim of this study was to quantify the proportion of variance in kinematic and kinetic inter-limb differences attributable to inter-limb differences in approach velocity and centre of mass deflection angle during a change of direction task. METHODS: A cohort of 192 patients (male, 23.8 ± 3.6 years, 6.3 ± 0.4 months post primary ACLR) completed a pre-planned 90° change of direction task on both their operated and non-operated limb. Inter-limb differences in approach velocity and CoM deflection angle were calculated alongside lower-extremity kinematic and kinetic variables. The relationship between inter-limb differences in task-level variables and inter-limb differences in kinematic and kinetic variables was examined using linear regression models. Kinematic and kinetic inter-limb differences were adjusted for inter-limb differences in approach velocity and CoM deflection angle. Adjusted and unadjusted inter-limb differences were submitted to one sample t-tests. RESULTS: Inter-limb differences in approach velocity and centre of mass deflection angle explained 3 - 60% of the variance in kinematic and kinetic inter-limb differences. Statistical inferences remained consistent between adjusted and unadjusted conditions with the exception of hip flexion angle. SIGNIFICANCE: Inter-limb differences in task-level features explain a large proportion of the variance in inter-limb differences in several kinematic and kinetic variables. Accounting for this variation reduced the magnitude of kinematic and kinetic inter-limb differences comparable to those previously observed in normative cohorts.

Upper Limb Strength and Performance Deficits after Glenohumeral Joint Stabilization Surgery in Contact and Collision Athletes.

PURPOSE: The primary aim was to identify and quantify differences in interlimb asymmetry magnitudes across a battery of upper extremity strength and performance tests at 4 and 6 months after glenohumeral joint stabilization surgery shoulder stabilization in contact and collision athletes compared with an un-injured group. A secondary aim was to investigate if identified asymmetry magnitudes changed from 4 to 6 months after glenohumeral joint stabilization surgery. The third aim was to explore associations within the different performance and strength variables. METHODS: Fifty-six male contact and collision sport athletes who had had undergone unilateral glenohumeral joint stabilization were tested at 4 and 6 months after surgery. An un-injured control group ( n = 39 for upper extremity performance tests, n = 47 for isokinetic dynamometry) were tested on a single occasion. Three upper extremity force platform-based performance tests and angle-specific concentric internal and external isokinetic shoulder rotational strength were assessed, and interlimb asymmetries were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: At 4 months after surgery, the glenohumeral joint stabilization group demonstrated significantly higher absolute interlimb asymmetry values than the un-injured group for almost all the performance test variables. In the ballistic upper-body performance tests, the glenohumeral joint stabilization group achieved only half the body elevation reached by the un-injured (counter-movement push-up jump height ( η2 = 0.50) and press-jump jump height ( η2 = 0.39)). At 6 months after surgery, absolute interlimb asymmetries reduced for the performance test variables, but some asymmetry persisted. The glenohumeral joint stabilization group had significantly greater absolute interlimb asymmetries for five out the eight isokinetic variables. CONCLUSIONS: Contact and collision athletes who may be cleared to return to sport at 4 to 6 months after glenohumeral joint stabilization surgery shoulder stabilization continue to demonstrate upper limb strength and performance deficits when compared with their un-injured limb and their un-injured counterparts.

A comparison of clinical assessment with common diagnostic tools for monitoring concussion recovery in adolescent rugby union players.

OBJECTIVES: To characterise the incidence, severity and recovery of sport-related concussion (SRC) in schoolboy rugby players and explore whether the Sports Concussion Assessment Tool (SCAT), Cogstate Brief Battery (CBB) and the King-Devick test (K-D test) can be used to monitor concussion status through to full recovery. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Rugby union has a high rate of SRC; however, there is little research investigating how concussion affects adolescent rugby players. PARTICIPANTS: Schoolboy rugby players. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Participants completed baseline tests in the preseason. Participants diagnosed with SRC during the season attended for post-concussion testing on a weekly basis until recovered. RESULTS: 135 schoolboy rugby players (16.7 ± 0.82y) participated in the study. There were 18 SRCs in 16 participants. Concussion incidence was 9/1000 player hours. CBB and K-D tests were poorly associated with clinical assessment and produced high false negative rates (0.58 and 0.52 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: This study reports a relatively high match SRC incidence for an adolescent population. Analysis of clinical recovery with CBB and K-D test revealed a relatively poor ability to accurately monitor concussion status compared to clinical assessment suggesting that these tools should not be used in isolation for monitoring SRC recovery in adolescents.

Relationship Between Isokinetic Knee Strength and Single-Leg Drop Jump Performance 9 Months After ACL Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Deficits in knee strength after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) surgery are common. Deficits in the single-leg drop jump (SLDJ), a test of plyometric ability, are also found. PURPOSE: To examine the relationship between isokinetic knee strength, SLDJ performance, and self-reported knee function 9 months after ACLR. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Knee isokinetic peak torque, SLDJ jump height, contact time, and reactive strength index (RSI), as well as International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores were assessed in 116 male, field-sport athletes at 9.2 months after ACLR. SLDJ testing took place in a 3-dimensional biomechanics laboratory. Linear regression models were used to analyze the relationship between the variables. RESULTS: A significant relationship was found between ACLR-limb isokinetic knee extensor strength and SLDJ jump height (P < .001, r 2 = 0.29) and RSI (P < .001, r 2 = 0.33), and between ACLR-limb isokinetic knee flexor strength and SLDJ jump height (P < .001, r 2 = 0.12) and RSI (P < .001, r 2 = 0.15). A significant positive relationship was also found between knee extensor asymmetry and SLDJ jump height asymmetry (P < .001, r 2 = 0.27) and SLDJ reactive strength asymmetry (P < .001, r 2 = 0.18). Combined ACLR-limb jump height and contact time best predicted IKDC scores (P < .001, r 2 = 0.12). CONCLUSION: Isokinetic knee extension strength explained approximately 30% of SLDJ performance, with a much weaker relationship between knee flexion strength and SLDJ performance. Isokinetic strength and SLDJ performance were weak predictors of variation in IKDC scores.

Six methods for classifying lower-limb dominance are not associated with asymmetries during a change of direction task.

Quantifying asymmetries between dominant and non-dominant limbs is a common research objective aimed at identifying systematic differences between limbs and establishing normative ranges of asymmetry. Multiple methods for classifying limb dominance exist, and it is unclear how different methods relate to directional asymmetries during change of direction (CoD). This study aimed to determine whether different methods of classifying limb dominance, including a novel CoD task-specific method, identified significant inter-limb asymmetries during a 90° CoD task. Fifty participants completed a testing battery consisting of jumping, hopping, CoD, and isokinetic dynamometry. Limb dominance was classified for each participant according to preferred kicking limb, vertical jump height, horizontal hop distance, initial force plate contact during landing, max isokinetic knee extensor strength, and turning velocity. Asymmetries in whole-body and joint-level mechanics were defined using each method. No method for classifying limb dominance was associated with consistent inter-limb biomechanical asymmetries during CoD, and no method was related to any other method. The magnitude of asymmetry relative to the magnitude of absolute asymmetry present within the cohort suggests that using these tasks to classify the dominant limb in this CoD is akin to assigning dominance to a randomly selected limb. Previous observations of group symmetry during CoD may be statistical artifacts as opposed to a true indication of normative movement. Until an appropriate means of classifying limbs during CoD is established, quantifying normative asymmetry based on limb dominance should be done with caution.

Movement strategy correspondence across jumping and cutting tasks after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

There are currently a multitude of tests used to assess readiness to return to sport (RTS) following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). The aim of this study was to establish the extent to which movement strategies transfer between three common assessment tasks to help improve design of athlete testing batteries following ACLR. A cohort of 127 male patients 8-10 months post-ACLR and 45 non-injured controls took part in the study. Three movement tasks were completed (unilateral and bilateral drop jump, and 90° pre-planned cut), while ground reaction forces and three-dimensional kinematics (250 Hz) were recorded. Compared to the bilateral drop jump and cut, the unilateral drop jump had a higher proportion of work done at the ankle (d = 0.29, p < 0.001 and d = -1.87, p < 0.001, respectively), and a lower proportion of work done at the knee during the braking phase of the task (d = 0.447, p < 0.001 and d = 1.56, p < 0.001, respectively). The ACLR group had higher peak hip moments than the non-injured controls, although the proportion of work done at the ankle, knee and hip joints were similar. Movement strategies were moderately and positively related at the ankle (rs  = 0.728, p < 0.001), knee (rs  = 0.638, p < 0.001) and hip (rs  = 0.593, p < 0.001) between the unilateral and bilateral drop jump, but there was no relationship at the ankle (rs  = 0.10, p = 0.104), knee (rs  = 0.106, p = 0.166) and hip (rs  = -0.019, p = 0.808) between the unilateral drop jump and the cut. Clinicians could therefore consider omitting one of the drop jumps from assessment batteries but should include both jumping and cutting tasks.

The effect of simulated marker misplacement on the interpretation of inter-limb differences during a change of direction task.

The objective assessment of biomechanical asymmetries during movement tasks is used to monitor rehabilitation following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Marker placement is an important source of methodological variability within human motion analysis. It is currently unclear how marker placement error effects the interpretation of biomechanical asymmetries throughout post ACLR rehabilitation. The aim of this investigation was to determine the effect of random marker placement variation on the interpretation of inter-limb differences during a change of direction (CoD) task. Forty-seven participants 9 months post-ACLR and fifty uninjured controls completed a 90° CoD task on both limbs. Inter-limb differences in kinematic and kinetic metrics during the CoD stance phase were calculated for both groups using the Vicon Plug-in Gait model, and ACLR subjects were classified as having 'normal' or 'abnormal' inter-limb differences relative to the control group. Simulated random marker displacements based on published marker placement error ranges were then repeatedly applied to the lateral thigh, femoral epicondyle and tibia markers. ACLR inter-limb differences were recalculated each time, allowing the estimation of 95% confidence intervals and minimal identifiable between-session changes. ACLR subjects were also reclassified relative to the control group after each simulation and the percentage of participants to change classification was calculated. Marker displacements caused large deviations in inter-limb difference measures in several variables including hip rotation angle, knee abduction angle and knee abduction moment, thus limiting the ability to identify participants with large inter-limb differences relative to a control group. These findings highlight the challenges in using marker-based biomechanical models to conduct objective assessments of inter-limb differences during CoD tasks.

The sensitivity of joint kinematics and kinetics to marker placement during a change of direction task.

The conventional gait model (CGM) refers to several closely related biomechanical models used in the objective analysis of human motion. Their use has become popular in the analysis of change of direction tasks to inform best practice in the prevention and rehabilitation of anterior cruciate ligament injury. As externally-placed markers define segment axes origins and orientations, kinematic and kinetic outputs from the CGM are sensitive to marker placement. The aim of this investigation was to quantify the sensitivity of lower extremity kinematics and knee moments to systematic differences in marker placement across the stance phase of a change of direction task. Systematic anterior/posterior displacements were applied to the lateral thigh, femoral epicondyle and tibia markers in software. One-dimensional statistical parametric mapping was used to determine the effect of marker placement across the entire stance phase of a 90° change of direction task. Marker placement error within previously reported inter-tester variability ranges caused significant differences in knee abduction moment, hip rotation angle, knee rotation angle, ankle abduction and rotation angle across various periods of stance. Discrete measures of these variables have been associated with increased frontal plane knee loading during change of direction, considered a key mechanism of anterior cruciate ligament injury. Systematic differences in marker placement may lead to incorrect group statistical inferences in such discrete measures.