Patient Acceptable Symptom State Thresholds for IKDC-SKF and KOOS at the 10-Year Follow-up After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury: A Study From the Delaware-Oslo ACL Cohort.

Background: Clinicians need thresholds for the Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) and Treatment Failure to interpret group-based patient-reported outcome measures after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury. Validated thresholds that are crucial for accurately discerning patient symptom state and facilitating effective interpretation have not been determined for long-term follow-up after ACL injury. Purpose: To calculate and validate thresholds for PASS and Treatment Failure for the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form (IKDC-SKF) and the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) subscales at the 10-year follow-up after ACL injury. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A total of 163 participants with unilateral ACL injury (treated with reconstruction or rehabilitation alone) from the Delaware-Oslo ACL Cohort were included. Thresholds for PASS were calculated for IKDC-SKF and KOOS subscales using anchor-based predictive modeling and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Too few participants had self-reported Treatment Failure to calculate thresholds for that outcome. Nonparametric bootstrapping was used to derive 95% CIs. The criterion validity of the predictive modeling and ROC-derived thresholds were assessed by comparing actual patient-reported PASS outcome with the calculated PASS outcome for each method of calculation and calculating their positive and negative predictive values with respect to the anchor questions. Results: A total of 127 (78%) participants reported satisfactory symptom state. Predictive modeling PASS thresholds (95% CIs) were 76.2 points (72.1-79.4 points) for IKDC-SKF, 85.4 points (80.9-89.2 points) for KOOS Pain, 76.5 points (67.8-84.7 points) for KOOS Symptoms, 93.8 points (90.1-96.9 points) for KOOS activities of daily living, 71.6 points (63.4-77.7 points) for KOOS Sports, and 59.0 points (53.7-63.9 points) for KOOS quality of life (QoL). Predictive modeling thresholds classified 81% to 93% of the participants as having satisfactory symptom state, whereas ROC-derived thresholds classified >50% as unsatisfied. The thresholds for IKDC-SKF, KOOS Sports, and KOOS QoL resulted in the most accurate percentages of PASS among all identified thresholds and therefore demonstrate the highest validity. Conclusion: Predictive modeling provided valid PASS thresholds for IKDC-SKF and KOOS at the 10-year follow-up after ACL injury. The thresholds for IKDC-SKF, KOOS Sports, and KOOS QoL should be used when determining satisfactory outcomes. ROC-derived thresholds result in substantial misclassification rates of the participants who reported satisfactory symptom state.

Weaker Quadriceps Muscle Strength With a Quadriceps Tendon Graft Compared With a Patellar or Hamstring Tendon Graft at 7 Months After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Impaired quadriceps muscle strength after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is associated with worse clinical outcomes and a risk of reinjuries. Yet, we know little about quadriceps muscle strength in patients reconstructed with a quadriceps tendon (QT) graft, which is increasing in popularity worldwide. PURPOSE: To describe and compare isokinetic quadriceps strength in patients undergoing ACLR with a QT, hamstring tendon (HT), or bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) autograft. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: We included patients with QT grafts (n = 104) and matched them to patients with HT (n = 104) and BPTB (n = 104) grafts based on age, sex, and associated meniscal surgery. Data were collected through clinical strength testing at a mean of 7 ± 1 months postoperatively. Isokinetic strength was measured at 90 deg/s, and quadriceps strength was expressed as the limb symmetry index (LSI) for peak torque, total work, torque at 30° of knee flexion, and time to peak torque. RESULTS: Patients with QT grafts had the most impaired isokinetic quadriceps strength, with the LSI ranging between 67.5% and 75.1%, followed by those with BPTB grafts (74.4%-81.5%) and HT grafts (84.0%-89.0%). Patients with QT grafts had a significantly lower LSI for all variables compared with patients with HT grafts (mean difference: peak torque: -17.4% [95% CI, -21.7 to -13.2], P < .001; total work: -15.9% [95% CI, -20.6 to -11.1], P < .001; torque at 30° of knee flexion: -8.8% [95% CI, -14.7 to -2.9], P = .001; time to peak torque: -17.7% [95% CI, -25.8 to -9.6], P < .001). Compared with patients with BPTB grafts, patients with QT grafts had a significantly lower LSI for all variables (mean difference: peak torque: -6.9% [95% CI, -11.2 to -2.7], P < .001; total work: -7.7% [95% CI, -12.4 to -2.9], P < .001; torque at 30° of knee flexion: -6.3% [95% CI, -12.2 to -0.5], P = .03; time to peak torque: -8.8% [95% CI, -16.9 to -0.7], P = .03). None of the graft groups reached a mean LSI of >90% for peak torque (QT: 67.5% [95% CI, 64.8-70.1]; HT: 84.9% [95% CI, 82.4-87.4]; BPTB: 74.4% [95% CI, 72.0-76.9]). CONCLUSION: At 7 months after ACLR, patients with QT grafts had significantly worse isokinetic quadriceps strength than patients with HT and BPTB grafts. None of the 3 graft groups reached a mean LSI of >90% in quadriceps strength.

The Delaware-Oslo ACL Cohort treatment algorithm yields superior outcomes to usual care 9-12 years after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

PURPOSE: Patient-reported outcomes were compared between participants who followed the treatment algorithm of the Delaware-Oslo ACL Cohort, consisting of progressive preoperative and postoperative rehabilitation, patient education, clinical testing and shared decision-making about treatment choice, and those who followed usual care 9-12 years after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). METHODS: Participants with primary ACLR were included from the Norwegian arm of the Delaware-Oslo ACL Cohort and the Norwegian Knee Ligament Registry (usual care). The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) subscale scores and the International Knee Documentation Committee-Subjective Knee Form (IKDC-SKF) scores were compared. KOOS scores for the usual care group were converted to IKDC-SKF scores with recently published validated crosswalk. The percentages of participants with scores above predefined thresholds for patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) were also calculated. RESULTS: Eighty of 100 (80%) participants from the Delaware-Oslo ACL Cohort and 1588 of 3248 (49%) from the usual care group participated in the follow-up. Participants from the Delaware-Oslo ACL Cohort had higher KOOS subscale (p < 0.001) and IKDC-SKF scores (p < 0.001), and a higher percentage reached PASS (84%-96% vs. 62%-76%, p ≤ 0.002) for KOOS Pain, symptoms, activities of daily living and sports compared to the usual care group. No significant differences were found for KOOS quality of life scores (not significant [n.s.]) or PASS percentages (80% vs. 74%, n.s.). CONCLUSION: Participants with ACLR who followed the Delaware-Oslo ACL Cohort treatment algorithm had reduced knee symptoms, superior function and higher percentages of satisfactory outcomes than participants who followed usual care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II.

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Rehabilitation for the 10- to 18-Year-Old Adolescent Athlete: Practice Guidelines Based on International Delphi Consensus.

Background: There are 2 treatment options for adolescent athletes with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries-rehabilitation alone (nonsurgical treatment) or ACL reconstruction plus rehabilitation. However, there is no clear consensus on how to include strength and neuromuscular training during each phase of rehabilitation. Purpose: To develop a practical consensus for adolescent ACL rehabilitation to help provide care to this age group using an international Delphi panel. Study Design: Consensus statement. Methods: A 3-round online international Delphi consensus study was conducted. A mix of open and closed literature-based statements were formulated and sent out to an international panel of 20 ACL rehabilitation experts. Statements were divided into 3 domains as follows: (1) nonsurgical rehabilitation; (2) prehabilitation; and (3) postoperative rehabilitation. Consensus was defined as 70% agreement between panel members. Results: Panel members agreed that rehabilitation should consist of 3 criterion-based phases, with continued injury prevention serving as a fourth phase. They also reached a consensus on rehabilitation being different for 10- to 16-year-olds compared with 17- and 18-year-olds, with a need to distinguish between prepubertal (Tanner stage 1) and mid- to postpubertal (Tanner stages 2-5) athletes. The panel members reached a consensus on the following topics: educational topics during rehabilitation; psychological interventions during rehabilitation; additional consultation of the orthopaedic surgeon; duration of postoperative rehabilitation; exercises during phase 1 of nonsurgical and postoperative rehabilitation; criteria for progression from phase 1 to phase 2; resistance training during phase 2; jumping exercises during phase 2; criteria for progression from phase 2 to phase 3; and criteria for return to sports (RTS). The most notable differences in recommendations for prepubertal compared with mid- to postpubertal athletes were described for resistance training and RTS criteria. Conclusion: Together with available evidence, this international Delphi statement provides a framework based on expert consensus and describes a practice guideline for adolescent ACL rehabilitation, which can be used in day-to-day practice. This is an important step toward reducing practice inconsistencies, improving the quality of rehabilitation after adolescent ACL injuries, and closing the evidence-practice gap while waiting for further studies to provide clarity.

Cross-validation of a machine learning algorithm that determines anterior cruciate ligament rehabilitation status and evaluation of its ability to predict future injury.

Classification algorithms determine the similarity of an observation to defined classes, e.g., injured or healthy athletes, and can highlight treatment targets or assess progress of a treatment. The primary aim was to cross-validate a previously developed classification algorithm using a different sample, while a secondary aim was to examine its ability to predict future ACL injuries. The examined outcome measure was 'healthy-limb' class membership probability, which was compared between a cohort of athletes without previous or future (No Injury) previous (PACL) and future ACL injury (FACL). The No Injury group had significantly higher probabilities than the PACL (p < 0.001; medium effect) and FACL group (p ≤ 0.045; small effect). The ability to predict group membership was poor for the PACL (area under curve [AUC]; 0.61

Four Distinct 5-Year Trajectories of Knee Function Emerge in Patients Who Followed the Delaware-Oslo ACL Cohort Treatment Algorithm.

BACKGROUND: Impairments and dysfunction vary considerably after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury, and distinct subgroups may exist. PURPOSE: (1) To identify subgroups of patients with ACL injury who share common trajectories of patient-reported knee function from initial presentation to 5 years after a treatment algorithm where they chose either ACL reconstruction (ACLR) plus rehabilitation or rehabilitation alone. (2) To assess associations with trajectory affiliation. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: We included 276 patients with a acute first-time complete unilateral ACL injury. All patients underwent a 5-week neuromuscular and strength training program before a shared decision-making process about treatment. Within their latest attended follow-up, 62% of patients had undergone early ACLR (<6 months after the 5-week program), 11% delayed ACLR (>6 months after the 5-week program), and 27% progressive rehabilitation alone. Patients completed the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form (IKDC-SKF) at inclusion, after the 5-week program, and at 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, and 5 years after ACLR or completion of the 5-week program (patients treated with rehabilitation alone). We used group-based trajectory modeling to identify trajectories of IKDC-SKF and multinomial logistic regression to assess associations with trajectory affiliation. RESULTS: Four distinct trajectories of IKDC-SKF were identified: Low (n = 22; 8.0% of the cohort), Moderate (n = 142; 51.4%), High (n = 105; 38.0%), and High Before Declining (n = 7; 2.5%). The High trajectory had higher scores at inclusion than the Moderate trajectory, but both improved considerably within 1 year and had thereafter stable high scores. The High Before Declining trajectory also started relatively high and improved considerably within 1 year but experienced a large deterioration between 2 and 5 years. The Low trajectory started low and had minimal improvement. New knee injuries were important characteristics of the High Before Declining trajectory, concomitant meniscal injuries were significantly associated with following the Low (vs Moderate) trajectory, and early/preoperative quadriceps strength and hop symmetry (measured at inclusion) were significantly associated with following the High (vs Moderate) trajectory. CONCLUSION: We identified 4 distinct 5-year trajectories of patient-reported knee function, indicating 4 subgroups of patients with ACL injury. Importantly, 88% of the patients who followed our treatment algorithm followed the Moderate and High trajectories characterized by good improvement and high scores. Due to eligibility criteria and procedures in our cohort, we can only generalize our model to athletes without major concomitant injuries who follow a similar treatment algorithm. Concomitant meniscal injuries and new knee injuries were important factors in the unfavorable Low and High Before Declining trajectories. These associations were exploratory but support the trajectories' validity. Our findings can contribute to patient education about prognosis and underpin the importance of continued secondary injury prevention.

Association of Quadriceps Strength Symmetry and Surgical Status With Clinical Osteoarthritis Five Years After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Rupture.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to examine the association of quadriceps strength symmetry and surgical status (anterior cruciate ligament [ACL] reconstruction or nonoperative management) with early clinical knee osteoarthritis (OA) 5 years after ACL injury or reconstruction. METHODS: In total, 204 of 300 athletes were analyzed 5 years after ACL injury or reconstruction. Quadriceps strength was measured and reported as a limb symmetry index. We identified participants with early clinical knee OA using the criteria that 2 of 4 Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) subscales score ≤85%. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) using logistic regression and adjusted for age, sex, meniscal injury, and body mass index to examine the associations of quadriceps strength and surgical status with clinical knee OA. RESULTS: In all, 21% of participants met the KOOS criteria for clinical knee OA. For every 1% increase in quadriceps limb symmetry index, there was a 4% lower odds of clinical OA (adjusted OR [ORadj ] 0.96 [95% CI 0.93-0.99]) at 5 years. Surgical status was not associated with clinical knee OA (ORadj 0.58 [95% CI 0.23-1.50]). CONCLUSION: More symmetric quadriceps strength, but not surgical status, 5 years after ACL injury or reconstruction was associated with lower odds of clinical knee OA.

Readiness for return to sport in non-surgically treated patients with anterior cruciate ligament injury following a public municipal rehabilitation program.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the proportion of patients that pass a return to sport (RTS) test battery and assess changes in patient-reported outcomes and lower extremity muscle strength following three months of exericse-based rehabilitation in non-surgically treated patients with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Clinical environment (public municipal). PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-nine ACL injured patients (54% female, median age (IQR) 28 years (24-35). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Knee Outcome Survey Activities of Daily Living Scale, single hop for distance, crossover hop for distance, side hop test, the Agility T-test, and quadriceps and hamstrings isometric maximal voluntary contraction (MVC). RESULTS: Following 3 months of rehabilitation, patients had statistically significant improvements in all patients-reported outcomes and in quadriceps and hamstring MVC. Of 28 patients who completed all RTS tests, 11% passed six RTS criteria, 14% five criteria, 11% four criteria, 4% three criteria, 18% two criteria, 21% one criterion, and 21% none of the criteria. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that three months of public municipal rehabilitation improves patient-reported outcomes and lower extremity muscle strength in non-surgically treated patients with ACL injury. However, only one in every 10 patients passed all RTS criteria.

Exercise Descriptors That Determine Muscle Strength Gains Are Missing From Reported Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Rehabilitation Programs: A Scoping Review of 117 Exercises in 41 Studies.

OBJECTIVE: To (1) describe which strength training exercise descriptors are reported in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) rehabilitation research, and (2) compare the current standards of reporting ACLR strength training exercise descriptors to international best-practice strength training guidelines. DESIGN: Scoping review. LITERATURE SEARCH: We searched the MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, Academic Search, ERIC, Health Source: Nursing, Health Source: Consumer, MasterFILE, and Africa-Wide Information databases. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: We included level I to IV studies of ACLR rehabilitation programs with 1 or more reported strength training exercise descriptors. We used a predefined list of 19 exercise descriptors, based on the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) exercise recommendations, the Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT), and the Toigo and Boutellier exercise descriptor framework. DATA SYNTHESIS: Completeness and the standard of reporting exercise descriptors in ACLR rehabilitation programs were assessed by means of international best-practice strength training standards. RESULTS: We extracted data on 117 exercises from 41 studies. A median of 7 of the 19 possible exercise descriptors were reported (range, 3-16). Reporting of specific exercise descriptors varied across studies, from 95% (name of the strength training exercise) to 5% (exercise aim, exercise order). On average, 46%, 35%, and 43% of the exercise descriptors included in the ACSM, CERT, and Toigo and Boutellier guidelines were reported, respectively. CONCLUSION: Key exercise descriptors for muscle strength gains are not reported in studies on ACLR rehabilitation. Only the exercise name, number of exercises, frequency, and experimental period were reported in most of the studies. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2022;52(2):100-112. Epub 16 Nov 2021. doi:10.2519/jospt.2022.10651.

Assessing implementation, limited efficacy, and acceptability of the BEAST tool: A rehabilitation and return-to-sport decision tool for nonprofessional athletes with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the implementation, limited efficacy, and acceptability of the BEAST (better and safer return to sport) tool - a rehabilitation and return-to-sport (RTS) decision tool after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) in nonprofessional athletes. DESIGN: Prospective cohort. PARTICIPANTS: 43 nonprofessional pivoting sport athletes with ACLR. MAIN OUTCOME: Clinician- and athlete-experienced implementation challenges (implementation), changes in quadriceps power, side hop and triple hop performance from 6 to 8 months after ACLR (limited efficacy), athletes' beliefs about the individual rehabilitation and RTS plans produced by the BEAST tool (acceptability). RESULTS: The BEAST tool was developed and then implemented as planned for 39/43 (91%) athletes. Hop and quadriceps power performance improved significantly, with the largest improvement in involved quadriceps power (standardised response mean 1.4, 95% CI:1.1-1.8). Athletes believed the rehabilitation and RTS plan would facilitate RTS (8.2 [SD: 2.0]) and reduce injury risk (8.3 [SD: 1.2]; 0 = not likely at all, 10 = extremely likely). CONCLUSION: The BEAST tool was implemented with few challenges and adjustments were rarely necessary. Athletes had large improvements in quadriceps power and hop performance on the involved leg. Athletes believed that the individual rehabilitation and RTS plans produced by the tool would facilitate RTS and reduce injury risk.

Low Rates of Radiographic Knee Osteoarthritis 5 Years After ACL Reconstruction or Rehabilitation Alone: The Delaware-Oslo ACL Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Patients and clinicians often struggle to choose the optimal management strategy for posttraumatic knee osteoarthritis (OA) after an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury. An evaluation of radiographic outcomes after a decision-making and treatment algorithm applicable in clinical practice can help to inform future recommendations and treatment choices. PURPOSE: To describe and compare 5-year radiographic outcomes and knee pain in individuals who had gone through our decision-making and treatment algorithm and chosen (1) early (<6 months) ACL reconstruction (ACLR) with pre- and postoperative rehabilitation, (2) delayed (>6 months) ACLR with pre- and postoperative rehabilitation, or (3) progressive rehabilitation alone. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: We included 276 patients with unilateral ACL injury from a prospective cohort study. Patients chose management using a shared decision-making process and treatment algorithm, and 5-year postoperative radiographs of the index and contralateral knees were assessed using the Kellgren and Lawrence (K&L) classification and minimum joint space width measurements. We defined radiographic tibiofemoral OA as K&L grade ≥2 and knee pain as a Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Pain ≤72. To further explore early radiographic changes, we included alternative cutoffs for radiographic knee OA using K&L grade ≥2/osteophyte (definite osteophyte without joint space narrowing) and K&L grade ≥1. RESULTS: At 5 years, 64% had undergone early ACLR; 11%, delayed ACLR; and 25%, progressive rehabilitation alone. Radiographic examination was attended by 187 patients (68%). Six percent of the cohort had radiographic tibiofemoral OA (K&L grade ≥2) in the index knee; 4%, in the contralateral knee. Using the alternative cutoffs at K&L grade ≥2/osteophyte and K&L grade ≥1, the corresponding numbers were 20% and 33% in the index knee and 18% and 29% in the contralateral knee. Six percent had a painful index knee. There were no statistically significant differences in any radiographic outcomes or knee pain among the 3 management groups. CONCLUSION: There were no statistically significant differences in any 5-year radiographic outcomes or knee pain among the 3 management groups. Very few of the patients who participated in our decision-making and treatment algorithm had knee OA or knee pain at 5 years.

Clinical, Functional, and Physical Activity Outcomes 5 Years Following the Treatment Algorithm of the Delaware-Oslo ACL Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries can be treated with or without ACL reconstruction (ACLR), and more high-quality studies evaluating outcomes after the different treatment courses are needed. The purpose of the present study was to describe and compare 5-year clinical, functional, and physical activity outcomes for patients who followed our decision-making and treatment algorithm and chose (1) early ACLR with preoperative and postoperative rehabilitation, (2) delayed ACLR with preoperative and postoperative rehabilitation, or (3) progressive rehabilitation alone. Early ACLR was defined as that performed ≤6 months after the preoperative rehabilitation program, and late ACLR was defined as that performed >6 months after the preoperative rehabilitation program. METHODS: We included 276 patients from a prospective cohort study. The patients had been active in jumping, pivoting, and cutting sports before the injury and sustained a unilateral ACL injury without substantial concomitant knee injuries. The patients chose their treatment through a shared decision-making process. At 5 years, we assessed the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form (IKDC-SKF), Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Marx Activity Rating Scale, sports participation, quadriceps muscle strength, single-legged hop performance, and new ipsilateral and contralateral knee injuries. RESULTS: The 5-year follow-up rate was 80%. At 5 years, 64% of the patients had undergone early ACLR, 11% had undergone delayed ACLR, and 25% had had progressive rehabilitation alone. Understandably, the choices that participants made differed by age, concomitant injuries, symptoms, and predominantly level-I versus level-II preinjury activity level. There were no significant differences in any clinical, functional, or physical activity outcomes among the treatment groups. Across treatment groups, 95% to 100% of patients were still active in some kind of sports and 65% to 88% had IKDC-SKF and KOOS scores above the threshold for a patient acceptable symptom state. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with ACL injury who were active in jumping, pivoting, and cutting sports prior to injury; who had no substantial concomitant knee injuries; and who followed our decision-making and treatment algorithm had good 5-year knee function and high sport participation rates. Three of 4 patients had undergone ACLR within 5 years. There were no significant differences in any outcomes among patients treated with early ACLR, delayed ACLR, or progressive rehabilitation alone. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Meniscus or Cartilage Injury at the Time of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Tear Is Associated With Worse Prognosis for Patient-Reported Outcome 2 to 10 Years After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES: (1) To assess prognostic factors for patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and physical activity 2 to 10 years after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) or anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury, and (2) to assess differences in prognostic factors between patients treated with ACLR and with rehabilitation alone. DESIGN: Prognosis systematic review. LITERATURE SEARCH: Systematic searches were performed in PubMed, Web of Science, and SPORTDiscus. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: We selected prospective cohort studies and randomized clinical trials that included adults or adolescents undergoing either ACLR or rehabilitation alone after ACL rupture. Studies had to assess the statistical association between potential prognostic factors (factors related to patient characteristics, injury, or knee symptoms/function measured at baseline or within 1 year) and outcomes (PROMs and physical activity). DATA SYNTHESIS: Our search yielded 997 references. Twenty studies met the inclusion criteria. Seven studies with low or moderate risk of bias remained for data synthesis. RESULTS: Moderate-certainty evidence indicated that concomitant meniscus and cartilage injuries were prognostic factors for worse PROMs 2 to 10 years after ACLR. Very low-certainty evidence suggested that body mass index, smoking, and baseline PROMs were prognostic factors for worse outcome. Very low-certainty evidence suggested that female sex and a worse baseline Marx Activity Rating Scale score were prognostic factors for a worse Marx Activity Rating Scale score 2 to 10 years after ACLR. There was a lack of studies on prognostic factors after rehabilitation alone. CONCLUSION: Concomitant meniscus and cartilage injuries were prognostic factors for worse long-term PROMs after ACLR. The certainty was very low for other prognostic factors. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2020;50(9):490-502. Epub 1 Aug 2020. doi:10.2519/jospt.2020.9451.

Activity and functional readiness, not age, are the critical factors for second anterior cruciate ligament injury - the Delaware-Oslo ACL cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To elucidate the relationships between age, return to level I sport (RTS) within the first postoperative year, passing RTS criteria and second anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury. METHODS: In a prospective cohort study, 213 athletes were followed for 2 years after ACL reconstruction to record second ACL injuries. Independent variables were age, passing RTS criteria and level I RTS within the first postoperative year (vs later or no RTS). We defined passing RTS criteria as ≥90 on the Knee Outcome Survey - Activities of Daily Living Scale, global rating scale of function and quadriceps strength/hop test symmetry. RESULTS: The follow-up rate was >87% for all outcomes. In multivariable analysis, level I RTS within the first postoperative year and passing RTS criteria were highly associated with second ACL injury (level I RTS HR: 6.0 (95% CI: 1.6 to 22.6), pass RTS criteria HR: 0.08 (95% CI: 0.01 to 0.6)), while age was not (age HR: 0.96 (95% CI: 0.89 to 1.04)). Athletes <25 years had higher level I RTS rates in the first postoperative year (60.4%) than older athletes (28.0%). Of those who returned to level I sport in the first postoperative year, 38.1% of younger and 59.1% of older athletes passed RTS criteria. CONCLUSION: High rates of second ACL injury in young athletes may be driven by a mismatch between RTS rates and functional readiness to RTS. Passing RTS criteria was independently associated with a lower second ACL rate. Allowing more time prior to RTS, and improving rehabilitation and RTS support, may reduce second ACL injury rates in young athletes with ACL reconstruction.

Evidence too weak to guide surgical treatment decisions for anterior cruciate ligament injury: a systematic review of the risk of new meniscal tears after anterior cruciate ligament injury.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the risk of new meniscal tears after treatment for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury, in children and adults with and without ACL reconstruction. DESIGN: Prognosis systematic review (PROSPERO registration number CRD42016036788). METHODS: We searched Embase, Ovid Medline, Cochrane, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, PEDro and Google Scholar from inception to 3rd May 2018. Eligible articles included patients with ACL injury (diagnosis confirmed by MRI and/or diagnostic arthroscopy), reported the number of meniscal tears at the time of ACL injury diagnosis/start of treatment and reported the number of new meniscal tears that subsequently occurred. Articles with fewer than 20 patients at follow-up, and articles limited to ACL revision surgery or multi-ligament knee injuries were excluded. Two independent reviewers screened articles, assessed eligibility, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We judged the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation (GRADE) working group methodology. RESULTS: Of 75 studies included in the systematic review, 54 studies with 9624 patients and 501 new meniscal tears were appropriate for quantitative analysis. Heterogeneity precluded data pooling. The risk of new meniscal tears was 0%-21% when follow-up was <2 years, 0%-29% when follow-up was 2 to 5 years, 5%-52% when follow-up was 5 to 10 years and 4%-31% when follow-up was longer than 10 years. The proportion of studies with high risk of selection, misclassification and detection bias was 84%, 69% and 68%, respectively. Certainty of evidence was very low. CONCLUSION: New meniscal tears occurred in 0%-52% of patients between 4 months and 20 years (mean 4.9±4.4 years) following treatment for ACL injury. The certainty of evidence was too low to guide surgical treatment decisions. This review cannot conclude that the incidence of new meniscal tears is lower if ACL injury is treated with surgery compared with treatment with rehabilitation only.

Be a Champion for Your Athlete's Health.

SYNOPSIS: Many athletes push themselves beyond their limits and sacrifice short-term well-being and long-term health for a chance at victory. Elite sport shapes a certain type of character: mentally and physically tough, and unrelenting in the pursuit of the marginal gains that separate champions from the second best. The difficult question, especially for elite sports, is, "How do managers, coaches, athletes, and members of the health team find the balance between protecting the athlete's health and pursuing athletic greatness?" In this Viewpoint, we offer 4 perspectives on the roles and responsibilities of sports physical therapists: (1) the care of, and ethical obligations to, the elite athlete, (2) decision making that is in the athlete's best interest, (3) building a working relationship with the athlete, and (4) supporting athletes who face end-of-career decisions. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2020;50(4):173-175. doi:10.2519/jospt.2020.0605.

Evidence-based recommendations for the management of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture.

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture occurs most commonly in young and active individuals and can have negative long-term physical and psychological impacts. The diagnosis is made with a combination of patient's history, clinical examination, and, if appropriate, magnetic resonance imaging. The objectives of management are to restore knee function, address psychological barriers to activity participation, prevent further injury and osteoarthritis, and optimize long-term quality of life. The three main treatment options for ACL rupture are (1) rehabilitation as first-line treatment (followed by ACL reconstruction (ACLR) in patients, who develop functional instability), (2) ACLR and post-operative rehabilitation as the first-line treatment, and (3) pre-operative rehabilitation followed by ACLR and post-operative rehabilitation. We provide practical recommendations for informing and discussing management options with patients, and describe patient-related factors associated with a worse ACL-rupture outcome. Finally, we define evidence-based rehabilitation and present phase-specific rehabilitation recommendations and criteria to inform return to sport decisions.