Female Athletes With Better Psychological Readiness Are at Higher Risk for Second ACL Injury After Primary ACL Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 1 in 4 athletes returning to sports will sustain a second anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury. Psychological factors related to kinesiophobia, confidence, and psychological readiness are associated with second ACL injury; however, the evidence is conflicting. HYPOTHESIS: Athletes who sustain a second ACL injury (ie, graft rupture or contralateral ACL rupture) within 2 years of ACL reconstruction (ACLR) would have greater kinesiophobia, less confidence, and lower psychological readiness prior to return to sport (RTS) compared with athletes who do not sustain a second ACL injury. STUDY DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a prospective randomized trial. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3. METHODS: A total of 39 female Level I/II athletes completed the following measures after postoperative rehabilitation and a 10-session RTS and second ACL injury prevention program: ACL Return to Sport after Injury (ACL-RSI) scale, the 11-item Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (TSK-11), and question 3 on the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) quality of life (QoL) subscale. Athletes were dichotomized based on whether they sustained a second ACL injury within 2 years of ACLR or not. Independent t tests determined group differences in TSK-11, KOOS-QoL, ACL-RSI, and the 3 individual components of the ACL-RSI (ie, emotions, confidence, risk appraisal). RESULTS: Nine athletes sustained a second ACL injury (4 graft ruptures and 5 contralateral ACL ruptures). The group that sustained a second ACL injury had higher scores on the ACL-RSI (P = 0.03), higher on the risk appraisal questions of the ACL-RSI (P < 0.01), and met RTS criteria sooner than athletes who did not (P = 0.04). All second ACL injuries occurred in athletes who underwent primary ACLR with hamstring tendon autografts. CONCLUSION: Athletes who sustained a second ACL within 2 years of ACLR had a more positive psychological outlook, higher scores on the specific questions related to the risk appraisal construct of the ACL-RSI, and met RTS criteria sooner than athletes who did not sustain a second ACL injury. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Counseling athletes about delaying RTS to reduce the risk of second ACL injury may be especially important in athletes who display high psychological readiness and meet RTS criteria sooner.

Virtual reality doorway and hallway environments alter gait kinematics in people with Parkinson disease and freezing.

BACKGROUND: Many people with Parkinson disease (PD) experience freezing of gait (FoG), a transient gait disturbance associated with increased fall risk and reduced quality of life. Head-mounted virtual reality (VR) systems allow overground walking and can create immersive simulations of physical environments that induce FoG. RESEARCH QUESTION: For people with PD who experience FoG (PD+FoG), are kinematic gait changes observed in VR simulations of FoG-provoking environments? METHODS: In a cross-sectional experiment, people with PD+FoG walked at their self-selected speed in a physical laboratory and virtual laboratory, doorway, and hallway environments. Motion analysis assessed whole-body kinematics, including lower extremity joint excursions, swing phase toe clearance, trunk flexion, arm swing, sagittal plane inclination angle, and spatiotemporal characteristics. One-way repeated measures analysis of variance was conducted to examine the effects of environment on gait variables, with planned contrasts between laboratory environments and the virtual doorway and hallway. RESULTS: Twelve participants with PD+FoG (mean age [standard deviation]=72.8 [6.5] years, disease duration=8.8 [8.9] years, 3 females) completed the protocol. The environment had significant and widespread effects on kinematic and spatiotemporal variables. Compared to the physical laboratory, reduced joint excursions were observed in the ankle, knee, and hip when walking in the virtual doorway and in the knee and hip when walking in the virtual hallway. In both the virtual doorway and hallway compared to the physical laboratory, peak swing phase toe clearance, arm swing, and inclination angle were reduced, and walking was slower, with shorter, wider steps. SIGNIFICANCE: Virtual doorway and hallway environments induced kinematic changes commonly associated with FoG episodes, and these kinematic changes are consistent with forward falls that are common during FoG episodes. Combined with the flexibility of emerging VR technology, this research supports the potential of VR applications designed to improve the understanding, assessment, and treatment of FoG.

Functional performance 6 months after ACL reconstruction can predict return to participation in the same preinjury activity level 12 and 24 months after surgery.

BACKGROUND: Assessing athletes' readiness is a key component for successful outcomes after ACL reconstruction (ACLR). OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether return-to-activity criteria, individually or in combination, at 6 months after ACLR can predict return to participation in the same preinjury activity level at 12 and 24 months after ACLR. METHODS: Ninety-five level I/II participants completed return-to-activity criteria testing (isometric quadriceps index, single-legged hop tests, Knee Outcome Survey-Activities of Daily Living Scale (KOS-ADLS) and Global Rating Score (GRS)) at 6 months after ACLR. The PASS group was defined as scoring >90% on all criteria and the FAIL group as scoring <90% on any criteria. At 12 and 24 months after ACLR, participants were asked if they had returned to participate in the same preinjury activity level or not. All return-to-activity criteria, except quadriceps index, were entered into the logistic regression model. RESULTS: 81% and 84.4% of the PASS group returned to participation in the same preinjury activity level, while only 44.2% and 46.4% of the FAIL group returned at 12 and 24 months, respectively, after ACLR. The 6-meter timed hop, single hop and triple hop limb symmetry indexes; GRS; and KOS-ADLS individually predicted the outcome of interest at 12 months after ACLR (range: R2: 0.12-0.22, p<0.024). In combination, they explained 27% of the variance (p=0.035). All hop tests, individually, predicted the outcome of interest at 24 months after ACLR (range: R2: 0.26-0.37; p<0.007); in combination they explained 45% of the variance (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Return to participation in the same preinjury activity level at 12 and 24 months after ACLR was higher in those who passed the criteria compared with those who failed. Individual and combined return-to-activity criteria predicted the outcomes of interest, with the hop tests as consistent predictors at 12 and 24 months after ACLR.

Report of the Primary Outcomes for Gait Mechanics in Men of the ACL-SPORTS Trial: Secondary Prevention With and Without Perturbation Training Does Not Restore Gait Symmetry in Men 1 or 2 Years After ACL Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Movement asymmetries during walking are common after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury and reconstruction and may influence the early development of posttraumatic osteoarthritis. Preoperative neuromuscular training (like perturbation training, which is neuromuscular training requiring selective muscle activation in response to surface perturbations) improves gait asymmetries and functional outcomes among people who are ACL-deficient, but the effect of postoperative perturbation training on gait mechanics after ACL reconstruction is unknown. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: Among men undergoing ACL reconstruction, we sought to compare strength, agility, and secondary prevention (SAP) treatment with SAP plus perturbation training (SAP+PERT) with respect to (1) gait mechanics; and (2) elimination of gait asymmetries 1 and 2 years after ACL reconstruction. METHODS: Forty men were randomized into a SAP group or a SAP+PERT group after ACL reconstruction and before returning to preinjury activities. Participants were required to achieve ≥ 80% quadriceps muscle strength symmetry, minimal knee effusion, full ROM, no reports of pain, and completion of a running progression (all between 3 and 9 months postoperatively) before enrollment. Of 94 potentially eligible athletic male patients evaluated < 9 months after ACL reconstruction, 54 were excluded for prespecified reasons. Participants underwent motion analysis during overground walking at 1 and 2 years postoperatively. Variables of interest included (1) sagittal and frontal plane hip and knee angles and moments at peak knee flexion angle; (2) sagittal plane hip and knee angles and moments at peak knee extension angle; (3) sagittal plane hip and knee excursion during weight acceptance; and (4) sagittal plane hip and knee excursion during midstance. We also calculated the proportion of athletes in each group who walked with clinically meaningful interlimb asymmetry in sagittal plane hip and knee variables and compared these proportions using odds ratios. There was no differential loss to followup between groups. RESULTS: There were no differences between the SAP or SAP+PERT groups for the biomechanical gait variables. The involved limb's knee excursion during midstance for the SAP (mean ± SD: 1 year: 15° ± 5°; 2 years: 16° ± 5°) and SAP+PERT (1 year: 16° ± 5°; 2 years: 15° ± 4°) athletes was not different between groups at 1 year (mean difference: -1°; 95% confidence interval [CI], -5° to 2°; p = 0.49) or 2 years (mean difference: 1°; 95% CI, -2° to 4°; p = 0.54). There were no differences between SAP and SAP+PERT athletes regarding the elimination of gait asymmetries, and gait asymmetries persisted to a large degree in both groups 1 and 2 years postoperatively. At 1 year, 11 of 18 SAP and 11 of 20 SAP+PERT athletes walked with truncated knee excursions during weight acceptance (odds ratio: 0.8, p = 0.70) and midstance (SAP 12 of 18, SAP+PERT 12 of 20; odds ratio: 0.8, p = 0.67), whereas at 2 years postoperatively, truncated knee excursions during weight acceptance (SAP seven of 17, SAP+PERT eight of 19; odds ratio: 1.0, p = 0.96) and midstance (SAP five of 17, SAP+PERT 11 of 19; odds ratio: 3.3, p = 0.09) remained prevalent. CONCLUSIONS: We found that a comprehensive, progressive return-to-sport training program with or without perturbation was not effective at restoring interlimb symmetry among men 1 or 2 years after ACL reconstruction. Although gait asymmetries improved from 1 to 2 years postoperatively, meaningful asymmetries persisted in both groups. To restore gait symmetry after ACL reconstruction, additional interventions likely are necessary. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, therapeutic study.

Report of the Clinical and Functional Primary Outcomes in Men of the ACL-SPORTS Trial: Similar Outcomes in Men Receiving Secondary Prevention With and Without Perturbation Training 1 and 2 Years After ACL Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Athletes often are cleared to return to activities 6 months after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction; however, knee function measures continue to improve up to 2 years after surgery. Interventions beyond standard care may facilitate successful return to preinjury activities and improve functional outcomes. Perturbation training has been used in nonoperative ACL injury and preoperative ACL reconstruction rehabilitation, but has not been examined in postoperative ACL reconstruction rehabilitation, specifically return to sport rehabilitation. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: The purpose of this study was to determine whether there were differences at 1 and 2 years after ACL reconstruction between the male SAP (strengthening, agility, and secondary prevention) and SAP+PERT (SAP protocol with the addition of perturbation training) groups with respect to (1) quadriceps strength and single-legged hop limb symmetry; (2) patient-reported knee outcome scores; (3) the proportion who achieve self-reported normal knee function; and (4) the time from surgery to passing return to sport criteria. METHODS: Forty men who had completed ACL reconstruction rehabilitation and met enrollment criteria (3-9 months after ACL reconstruction, > 80% quadriceps strength limb symmetry, no pain, full ROM, minimal effusion) were randomized into the SAP or SAP+PERT groups of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament-Specialised Post-Operative Return to Sports trial (ACL-SPORTS), a single-blind randomized clinical study of secondary prevention and return to sport. Quadriceps strength, single-legged hopping, the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) 2000 subjective knee form, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS)-sports and recreation, and KOOS-quality-of-life subscales were collected 1 and 2 years after surgery by investigators blind to group. Athletes were categorized as having normal or abnormal knee function at each time point based on IKDC score, and the time until athletes passed strict return-to-sport criteria was also recorded. T-tests, chi square tests, and analyses of variance were used to identify differences between the treatment groups over time. RESULTS: There were no differences between groups for quadriceps symmetry (1 year: SAP = 101% ± 14%, SAP+PERT = 101% ± 14%; 2 years: SAP = 103% ± 11%, SAP+PERT = 98% ± 14%; mean differences between groups at 1 year: 0.4 [-9.0 to 9.8], 2 years = 4.5 [-4.3 to 13.1]; mean difference between 1 and 2 years: SAP = -1.0 [-8.6 to 6.6], SAP+PERT = 3.0 [-4.3 to 10.3], p = 0.45) or single-legged hop test limb symmetry. There were no clinically meaningful differences for any patient-reported outcome measures. There was no difference in the proportion of athletes in each group who achieved normal knee function at 1 year (SAP 14 of 19, SAP+PERT 18 of 20, odds ratio 0.31 [0.5-19.0]; p = 0.18); however, the SAP+PERT group had fewer athletes with normal knee function at 2 years (SAP 17 of 17, SAP+PERT 14 of 19, p = 0.03). There were no differences between groups in the time to pass return to sport criteria (SAP = 325 ± 199 days, SAP+PERT = 233 ± 77 days; mean difference 92 [-9 to 192], p = 0.09). CONCLUSIONS: This randomized trial found few differences between an ACL rehabilitation program consisting of strengthening, agility, and secondary prevention and one consisting of those elements as well as perturbation training. In the absence of clinically meaningful differences between groups in knee function and self-reported outcomes measures, the results indicate that perturbation training may not contribute additional benefit to the strengthening, agility, and secondary prevention base of the ACL-SPORTS training program. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, therapeutic study.

Do Patients Failing Return-to-Activity Criteria at 6 Months After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Continue Demonstrating Deficits at 2 Years?

BACKGROUND: The variability in outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) might be related to the criteria that are used to determine athletes' readiness to return to their preinjury activity level. A battery of return-to-activity criteria (RTAC) that emphasize normal knee function and movement symmetry has been instituted to quantitatively determine athletes' readiness to return to preinjury activities. PURPOSE: To investigate performance-based and patient-reported measures at 12 and 24 months after ACLR between patients who passed or failed RTAC at 6 months after ACLR. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: A total of 108 patients who had participated in International Knee Documentation Committee level 1 or 2 sports activities completed RTAC testing at 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery. The RTAC included the isometric quadriceps strength index (QI), 4 single-legged hop tests, the Knee Outcome Survey-activities of daily living subscale (KOS-ADLS), and the global rating scale of perceived function (GRS). Patients who scored ≥90% on all RTAC were classified as the pass group, and those who scored <90% on any RTAC were classified as the fail group. At 12- and 24-month follow-ups, patients were asked if they had returned to the same preinjury activity level. RESULTS: At the 6-month follow-up, there were 48 patients in the pass group and 47 in the fail group. At the 12-month follow-up, 31 patients (73.8%) from the pass group and 15 patients (39.5%) from the fail group passed RTAC, and at the 24-month follow-up, 25 patients (75.8%) from the pass group and 14 patients (51.9%) from the fail group passed RTAC. The rate of return to activities in the pass group was 81% and 84% at 12 and 24 months after ACLR, respectively, compared with only 44% and 46% in the fail group ( P ≤ .012), respectively; however, some patients in the fail group participated in preinjury activities without being cleared by their therapists. At 12 and 24 months, 60.5% and 48.1% of patients continued to fail again on the criteria, respectively. A statistically significant group × time interaction was found for the single hop and 6-m timed hop limb symmetry indices (LSIs) ( P ≤ .037), with only the fail group demonstrating a significant improvement over time. A main effect of group was detected for the QI and the crossover hop and triple hop LSIs ( P < .01), with patients in the pass group demonstrating higher performance. A main effect of time was detected for the crossover hop and triple hop LSIs and the GRS, with improvements seen in both groups ( P < .05). CONCLUSION: Patients who passed the RTAC early after ACLR were more likely to demonstrate normal knee function and movement symmetry at 12 and 24 months postoperatively, while patients who failed the RTAC early were more likely to demonstrate impaired knee function and movement asymmetry at 12- and 24-month follow-ups. Patients in the pass group had a higher rate of return to their preinjury activity level compared with those in the fail group. A group of patients chose to return to their preinjury activities, even though they were functionally not ready.