The 2016 Warwick Agreement on femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) syndrome was convened to build an international, multidisciplinary consensus on the diagnosis and management of patients with FAI syndrome. 22 panel members and 1 patient from 9 countries and 5 different specialties participated in a 1-day consensus meeting on 29 June 2016. Prior to the meeting, 6 questions were agreed on, and recent relevant systematic reviews and seminal literature were circulated. Panel members gave presentations on the topics of the agreed questions at Sports Hip 2016, an open meeting held in the UK on 27-29 June. Presentations were followed by open discussion. At the 1-day consensus meeting, panel members developed statements in response to each question through open discussion; members then scored their level of agreement with each response on a scale of 0-10. Substantial agreement (range 9.5-10) was reached for each of the 6 consensus questions, and the associated terminology was agreed on. The term 'femoroacetabular impingement syndrome' was introduced to reflect the central role of patients' symptoms in the disorder. To reach a diagnosis, patients should have appropriate symptoms, positive clinical signs and imaging findings. Suitable treatments are conservative care, rehabilitation, and arthroscopic or open surgery. Current understanding of prognosis and topics for future research were discussed. The 2016 Warwick Agreement on FAI syndrome is an international multidisciplinary agreement on the diagnosis, treatment principles and key terminology relating to FAI syndrome.

ObjectiveTo describe the criteria used to clear athletes to return to sport (RTS) following primary ACL reconstruction.DesignScoping review.Data sourcesMEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and SPORTDiscus electronic databases were searched using keywords related to ACL and RTS.Eligibility criteriaProspective or retrospective studies reporting at least one RTS criterion for athletes who had primary ACL reconstruction with an autograft.ResultsIn total, 209 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. RTS criteria were categorised into six domains: time, strength, hop testing, clinical examination, patient-report and performance-based criteria. From the 209 included studies, time was used in 178 studies (85%), and in 88 studies (42%) was the sole RTS criterion. Strength tests were reported in 86 studies (41%). Sixteen different hop tests were used in 31 studies (15%). Clinical examination was used in 54 studies (26%), patient report in 26 studies (12%) and performance-based criteria in 41 studies (20%).SummaryTime and impairment-based measures dominated RTS criteria, despite sport being a complex physical and biopsychosocial activity with demands across all aspects of function. Time was included as a criterion in 85% of studies, and over 80% of studies allowed RTS before 9 months. Whether RTS tests are valid—do they predict successful RTS?—is largely unknown.

PROSPERO Registration # CRD42014010144.

Background There is no consensus on the components of return-to-sport (RTS) testing following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction or whether passing RTS criteria can reduce a patient's risk of reinjury. Objectives To determine whether impartial, criteria-based RTS decisions are associated with less risk of a second ACL injury (either graft failure or contralateral ACL injury). Methods In this systematic review with meta-analysis, the authors conducted an electronic literature search in PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global using database-specific vocabulary related to ACL reconstruction and return to sport. Individual study quality was assessed using the modified Downs and Black checklist, and overall quality of evidence was determined with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation scale. Pooled risk difference (passed versus failed RTS criteria), injury incidence proportion, and the diagnostic accuracy of each RTS criterion were calculated. Results Four studies met the selection criteria. Overall, 42.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 18%, 69%) of patients passed RTS criteria, and 14.4% (95% CI: 8%, 21%) of those who passed experienced a second ACL injury (graft rupture or contralateral ACL injury). There was a nonsignificant 3% reduced risk of a second ACL injury after passing RTS criteria (risk difference, −3%; 95% CI: −16%, 10%; I2 = 74%, P = .610). The evidence rating of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation scale was “very low quality,” due to imprecision and heterogeneity of the pooled risk difference estimate. Conclusion Passing RTS criteria did not show a statistically significant association with risk of a second ACL injury. The quality-of-evidence rating prevents a definitive conclusion on this question and indicates an opportunity for future research. Level of Evidence Prognosis, Level 2a-. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2019;49(2):43–54. Epub 30 Nov 2018. doi:10.2519/jospt.2019.8190

Recently, clinicians have focused much attention on the importance of hip strength for the rehabilitation of not only patients with low back pain but also lower extremity pathology. Properly designing a rehabilitation program for the gluteal muscles requires careful consideration of biomechanical principles, such as length of the external moment arm, gravity, and subject positioning. Understanding the anatomy and function of these muscles also is essential. Electromyography (EMG) provides a useful means to determine muscle activation levels during specific exercises. Descriptions of specific exercises, as they relate to the gluteal muscles, are described. The specific performance of these exercises, the reliability of such EMG measures, and descriptive figures are also detailed. Of utmost importance to practicing clinicians is the interpretation of such data and how it can be best used in exercise prescription when formulating a treatment plan.