Concurrent assessments of lower limb loading patterns, mechanical muscle strength and functional performance in ACL-patients — A cross-sectional study

Holsgaard-Larsen, Anders; Jensen, Claus Hjorth; Mortensen, Niels Hm; Aagaard, Per

doi:10.1016/j.knee.2013.06.002

Cited by 49 publications

(99 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…2,4 Return to sport with lower limb asymmetrical loading may lead to deleterious consequences both in the short term, such as an increase of the risk for re-injury 6 , and in the long term, such as the development of knee post-traumatic osteoarthritis. 7 Asymmetrical lower extremity loading can easily be assessed in advanced phases of rehabilitation, by using tasks which resemble sport performance like a vertical jump on force platforms 4,8 . However, testing asymmetrical lower extremity loading during functional movements in the early phases after surgery is an issue, as these movements must not excessively overload the knee joint.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Asymmetrical Lower Extremity Loading Early After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Is a Significant Predictor of Asymmetrical Loading at the Time of Return to Sport

Labanca

Laudani²,

Menotti

et al. 2016

American Journal of Physical Medicine &Amp; Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: To examine whether asymmetrical lower limb loading early after ACL reconstruction (one month) can predict asymmetrical lower limb loading at the time of return to sport (6 months) and whether other early predictors as knee joint range of motion or maximal isometric strength affect this relationship.Design: Ground reaction forces were measured during a sit to stand task (STS) one month after ACL reconstruction and a vertical countermovement jump (CMJ) 6 months after ACL reconstruction in 58 athletes. Other early post-operative measurements were knee joint range of motion (2 weeks, 1 month and 2 months after surgery) and maximal isometric strength of the knee extensor and flexor muscles (2 months after surgery). Linear regression models were developed using side-to-side limb symmetry index (LSI) of CMJ as the dependent variable.Results: LSI of STS 1 month after surgery was a significant independent predictor of LSI of CMJ 6 months after surgery. After accounting for deficits in knee joint range of motion and LSI of maximal isometric strength (ΔR 2 =0.35 p<0.01), LSI of STS predicted LSI of CMJ (ΔR 2 =0.14 p<0.01). Conclusions:Asymmetrical lower extremity loading one month after ACL reconstruction is an early predictor of asymmetrical lower extremity loading 6 months after surgery.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…4,8 The vertical jump on a force platform for the late assessment of asymmetrical lower extremity loading is related to sport performance. 10,11 It is not surprising that it has been used since the late sixties as the gold standard for assessing maximal muscle power in the lower limbs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Asymmetrical Lower Extremity Loading Early After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Is a Significant Predictor of Asymmetrical Loading at the Time of Return to Sport

Labanca

Laudani²,

Menotti

et al. 2016

American Journal of Physical Medicine &Amp; Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Five case-control studies investigated muscular capacity deficits of ACL-R compared to healthy controls (Drechsler, Cramp, & Scott, 2006;Holsgaard-Larsen, Jensen, Mortensen, & Aagaard, 2013;Hsiao, et al, 2014;Urbach, et al, 2001;Xergia, Pappas, Zampeli, Georgiou, & Georgoulis, 2013). Two studies demonstrated weaknesses in quadriceps strength that were still present at both 1 and 3 months after injury in males and females during isometric and isokinetic contraction (Drechsler, et al, 2006;Hsiao, et al, 2014).…”

Section: Muscular Capacitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Mapping current research trends on neuromuscular risk factors of non-contact ACL injury

Rafeeuddin

Sharir

Staes

et al. 2016

Physical Therapy in Sport

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Only one study [36] observed a greater KAM in an ACLR group during a side hop (6.96 vs. The other eleven studies investigated biomechanical variables in the context of stability and postural control [37][38][39][40], gait [41], vision [42], limb asymmetry [43], walk and jog patterns [44], gender differences [45], as well as neuromuscular aspects [46]. Landing strategies and medio-lateral control of the ACLD and ACLR patients were also investigated by Roos et al [47] and found that these groups had not fully recovered.…”

Section: Level 2 Evidencementioning

confidence: 99%

Mapping current research trends on anterior cruciate ligament injury risk against the existing evidence: In vivo biomechanical risk factors

Sharir

Rafeeuddin

Staes

et al. 2016

Clinical Biomechanics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Whilst many studies measure large numbers of biomechanical parameters and associate these to anterior cruciate ligament injury risk, they cannot be considered as anterior cruciate ligament injury risk factors without evidence from prospective studies. A review was conducted to systematically assess the in vivo biomechanical literature to identify biomechanical risk factors for non-contact anterior cruciate ligament injury during dynamic sports tasks; and to critically evaluate the research trends from retrospective and associative studies investigating non-contact anterior cruciate ligament injury risk. Methods: An electronic literature search was undertaken on studies examining in vivo biomechanical risk factors associated with non-contact anterior cruciate ligament injury. The relevant studies were assessed by classification; level 1 -a prospective cohort study, level 2 -a retrospective study or level 3 -an associative study. Findings: An initial search revealed 812 studies but this was reduced to 1 level 1 evidence study, 20 level 2 evidence studies and 175 level 3 evidence studies that met all inclusion criteria. Level 1 evidence showed that the knee abduction angle, knee abduction moment and ground reaction force were biomechanical risk factors. Nine level 2 studies and eightythree level 3 studies used these to assess risk factors in their study. Inconsistencies in results and methods were observed in level 2 and 3 studies. Interpretation: There is a lack of high quality, prospective level 1 evidence related to biomechanical risk factors for non-contact anterior cruciate ligament injury. More prospective cohort studies are required to determine risk factors and provide improved prognostic capability.

show abstract

Concurrent assessments of lower limb loading patterns, mechanical muscle strength and functional performance in ACL-patients — A cross-sectional study

Cited by 49 publications

References 54 publications

Asymmetrical Lower Extremity Loading Early After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Is a Significant Predictor of Asymmetrical Loading at the Time of Return to Sport

Asymmetrical Lower Extremity Loading Early After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Is a Significant Predictor of Asymmetrical Loading at the Time of Return to Sport

Mapping current research trends on neuromuscular risk factors of non-contact ACL injury

Mapping current research trends on anterior cruciate ligament injury risk against the existing evidence: In vivo biomechanical risk factors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About