DYNEELAX Robotic Arthrometer Reliability and Feasibility on Healthy and Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injured/Reconstructed Persons.

Background: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries are commonly assessed using clinical examination and magnetic resonance imaging, but these methods have limitations in reproducibility and quantification. Instrumented laxity measurements using devices, like the DYNEELAX®, offer an alternative approach. However, to date, there is no human data on the DYNEELAX® and the reliability of these devices remains a subject of debate, and there is no consensus on appropriate knee tightening levels for testing. We hypothesized that the DYNEELAX®, with standardized knee tightening, would provide reliable measurements of knee laxity in adult volunteers. Methods: This prospective cohort study involved 48 pain-free adult volunteers. Laxity measurements were taken using a robotic-type motorized instrument (DYNEELAX®) on two separate occasions, at least 1 h and no more than 8 h apart, with knee tightening forces of 90 N ± 5 N. Metrics of anterior tibial translation and internal/external tibial axial rotations were recorded. Results: The device displayed excellent intrarater reliability for all the metrics, with intraclass correlation coefficients ranging from 0.91 to 0.96. Anterior translation exhibited the highest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.96), with a minimum detectable change of 0.83 mm. Conclusions: DYNEELAX® is reliable in measuring knee laxity in adult volunteers when using standardized stabilizing knee tightening forces of 90 ± 5 N. The most sensitive measurement parameters (in terms of minimum detectable change as a proportion of the observed range) were anterior translation (in mm) at 150 N and secondary compliance.

Beware of the 'moving target' - uninvolved limb strength increases to exceed pre-operative values during rehabilitation after ACL reconstruction in male professional and recreational athletes.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the changes in quadriceps and hamstrings muscle strength in the uninvolved limb of male professional and recreational athletes during rehabilitation after ACLR and compare to preoperative strength values. DESIGN: Prospective longitudinal study. METHODS: During rehabilitation, 665 participants who underwent unilateral ACLR performed a strength test preoperatively and every 6 weeks after surgery for up to 9 months. Isokinetic quadriceps and hamstrings strength of the uninvolved limb were measured at an angular velocity of 60°/s and normalized to body weight (Nm/kg). RESULTS: Quadriceps and hamstrings strength of the uninvolved limb gradually increased during rehabilitation until 6 months post-ACLR, and plateaued thereafter. Postoperative quadriceps' strength significantly exceeded preoperative values by 3 months for professional (2.99 Nm/kg, CI 95% 2.93-3.04, p=0.007) and by 6 months for recreational athletes (2.77Nm/kg, CI 95% 2.71-2.83, p<0.001), and hamstrings exceeded pre-surgery levels by 4.5 months (1.71Nm/kg, CI 95% 1.67-1.74, p<0.001 and 1.43 Nm/kg, CI 95% 1.40-1.46, p=0.002, professional and recreational athletes respectively). CONCLUSION: In male professional and recreational athletes, uninvolved limb quadriceps and hamstrings strength gradually improved after ACLR, until 6 months after surgery. The uninvolved limb's strength may present as a 'moving target' that requires consistent monitoring during rehabilitation.

The MyJump App is a Valid Method of Assessing and Classifying Limb Symmetry During Recovery from Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.

Background: Jump testing performance and limb symmetry measures are important metrics for clinicians to monitor during rehabilitation after Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) reconstruction, however they require hardware and software which is not commonly available in clinical practice. Video-based solutions may present a feasible alternative, but their veracity in classifying patients using limb-symmetry of 90% has not been established, nor have the clinimetric values for the performance measures been reported in this population. Purpose: To describe the diagnostic accuracy (pass/fail using 90% LSI) and clinimetrics of an iPad-based app ("MyJump") compared to reference force plate analyses for limb symmetry, jump/hop height, contact time, flight time, and reactive strength index. Study design: Prospective cohort, diagnostic accuracy. Methods: Fifty-one consecutive patients recovering from ACL reconstruction undertaking routine independent clinical evaluation of their hop and jump performance were concurrently and independently examined using force plates and the MyJump app. Diagnostic accuracy of MyJump was compared to reference force plate analyses using a criterion of 90% limb symmetry. Results: Diagnostic accuracy of the MyJump app was very good: positive predictive value for jump height was 0.83 and 1.0 for reactive strength index, and negative predictive value was 0.95 and 1.0 for the same metrics, respectively. Of the 131 classifications made using the MyJump app, there were five false positives and three false negatives - all of these were in classification of jump height with no misclassifications of RSI. Irrespective of jump type, the MyJump app displayed excellent reliability (ICC>0.95) for both height and reactive strength index. Minimum detectable changes were approximately 1cm for height, 0.1 for reactive strength index, 0.02s for contact time, and 0.3s for flight time. Conclusion: Where force plates are unavailable, the MyJump app is a valid and reliable substitute for criteria assessment of jump/hop height and reactive strength index in those recovering from ACL surgery using a 90% limb symmetry threshold. The minimum detectable changes vary by metric but are likely sufficiently accurate to detect clinical changes. Level Of Evidence: Level 3.

Performance and symmetry measures during vertical jump testing at return to sport after ACL reconstruction.

OBJECTIVE: Vertical jump tests are more sensitive in revealing asymmetries in performance metrics at the time of return to sport after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) than horizontal hop tests. However, it remains unclear which vertical tests (bilateral or unilateral) and which metrics (kinetics or performance) are most effective in informing the rehabilitation status and readiness for return to sport. We aimed to investigate the status of athletes during vertical jump testing at return to sport after ACLR. METHODS: A dual force platform system was used to evaluate jumping performance of 126 recreational and professional athletes at the time of return to sport after ACLR, as well as 532 healthy control participants. Performance and kinetic metrics were collected during four jump tests: double-leg countermovement jump, single-leg countermovement jump, double-leg 30 cm drop jump and single-leg 15 cm drop jump. Between-limb and between-group differences were explored using mixed models analyses. RESULTS: At the time of return to sport after ACLR, athletes still presented significant differences favouring the uninvolved side, particularly in the symmetry of the concentric impulse (p<0.001) in all jumps compared with the control group. Peak landing force asymmetry was greater in the ACLR group than the controls during the countermovement (p<0.001, MD=-11.6; 95% CI -15.4 to -7.9) and the double-leg drop jump (p=0.023, MD=-8.9; 95% CI -14.9 to -2.8). The eccentric impulse asymmetry was significantly greater (p=0.018, MD=-3.8; 95% CI -5.8 to -1.7) in the ACLR group during the single-leg drop jump only. Jump height was significantly lower (p<0001) in the ACLR group compared with controls in all tests except the double-leg drop jump. CONCLUSION: At the time of return to sport after ACLR, despite passing the traditional discharge criteria, athletes remained asymmetrical during all vertical jump tests, in the concentric (push-off) phase, during landing from bilateral jumps and for most performance metrics. Clinicians should aim to restore not only symmetry in ground reaction forces but also absolute performance metrics such as jump height, reactive strength index and contact times, to potentially reduce injury risk and improve overall athletic performance.

Lower Patellofemoral Joint Contact Force During Side-Step Cutting After Return-to-Sports Clearance Following Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Low patellofemoral joint (PFJ) contact force has been associated with PFJ osteoarthritis. Quadriceps force and knee flexion angles, which are typically altered after an anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), primarily influence PFJ contact forces. It is still inconclusive whether differences in PFJ contact forces are present during high knee flexion tasks such as side-step cutting after clearance to return to sports (RTS) after ACLR. PURPOSE: To explore PFJ contact forces in the ACLR limb and compare them with those of the contralateral and control limbs during side-step cutting tasks after clearance to RTS. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: A total of 26 male athletes with ACLR who were previously cleared to RTS were matched with 23 healthy men serving as the control group. Three-dimensional motion capture and force plate data were collected while both groups performed anticipated side-step cutting tasks. Joint kinematics, kinetics, muscle forces, and PFJ contact forces were calculated using musculoskeletal modeling. RESULTS: Peak PFJ force was lower in the ACLR limbs compared with the contralateral limbs (mean difference [MD], 5.89 body weight [BW]; 95% CI, 4.7-7.1 BW; P < .001) and the control limbs (MD, 4.44 BW; 95% CI, 2.1-6.8 BW; P < .001). During peak PFJ force, knee flexion angle was lower in ACLR limbs compared with the contralateral (MD, 4.88°; 95% CI, 3.0°-6.7°; P < .001) and control (MD, 6.01°; 95% CI, 2.0°-10.0°; P < .002) limbs. A lower quadriceps force compared with the contralateral (MD, 4.14 BW; 95% CI, 3.4-4.9 BW; P < .001) and control (MD, 2.83 BW; 95% CI, 1.4-4.3 BW; P < .001) limbs was also found. CONCLUSION: Lower PFJ contact forces and a combination of quadriceps force deficits and smaller knee flexion angle were found in the ACLR compared with the contralateral and control limbs even after clearance to RTS. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Despite rehabilitation and subsequent clearance to RTS, differences in PFJ contact forces are present after ACLR. Current rehabilitation and RTS battery may not be effective and sensitive enough to identify and address these differences.

Aspetar clinical practice guideline on rehabilitation after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

This guideline was developed to inform clinical practice on rehabilitation after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) and was performed in accordance with the Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch & Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument and used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. A Guideline Development Group systematically searched and reviewed evidence using randomised clinical trials and systematic reviews to evaluate the effectiveness of rehabilitation interventions and guide clinicians and patients on the content of the optimal rehabilitation protocol after ACLR.The guideline targets patients during rehabilitation after ACLR and investigates the effectiveness of the available interventions to the physiotherapist, alone or in combination (eg, exercise, modalities, objective progression criteria). Exercise interventions should be considered the mainstay of ACLR rehabilitation. However, there is little evidence on the dose-response relationship between volume and/or intensity of exercise and outcomes. Physical therapy modalities can be helpful as an adjunct in the early phase of rehabilitation when pain, swelling and limitations in range of motion are present. Adding modalities in the early phase may allow earlier pain-free commencement of exercise rehabilitation. Return to running and return to training/activity are key milestones for rehabilitation after ACLR. However, there is no evidence on which progression or discharge criteria should be used.While there is a very low level of certainty for most components of rehabilitation, most of the recommendations provided in this guideline were agreed to by expert clinicians. This guideline also highlights several new elements of ACLR management not reported previously.