Background Psychological patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are recommended for use in test batteries to aid in decision-making, regarding whether patients are well prepared to return to sports (RTS) after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. However, the values that should be regarded as “pass” or “fail” are still unclear. Purpose This study aimed to identify cut-off values for three commonly used psychological PROs that could differentiate patients who suffer a second ACL injury from patients who do not within two years of RTS in patients after ACL reconstruction with respect to recovery of symmetrical quadriceps strength. Study design Diagnostic/prognostic study Methods Demographic data, isokinetic strength test data for quadriceps, as well as results for the ACL-Return to Sport after Injury scale (ACL-RSI), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) Quality of Life, and Function in Sport and Recreation sub-scales, and the 18-item version of the Knee Self-Efficacy Scale (K-SES18) were extracted from a registry. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were calculated for each PRO. Accuracy of the cut-offs was presented with two summary measures for the ROC: the area under the curve (AUC) and Youden index. Results In total, 641 (355 men, 61%) patients (24.8 [SD 7.6] year old at ACL reconstruction) were included. The cut-off values were not able to differentiate patients who suffered a second ACL injury up to 24 months after RTS and ACL reconstruction from patients who did not. Additionally, achieving symmetrical quadriceps strength did not improve the cut-off psychometric properties. Conclusion Since cut-off values could not differentiate between patients who suffered a second ACL injury and those who did not, clinicians should not rely only on cut-off values or a single PRO of those analyzed in this study when making decisions on which patients are at risk of experiencing a second ACL injury when returning to sports after ACL reconstruction. Level of Evidence Level 3
Background: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries are common sports-related injuries with a high risk of reinjury after return to sport (RTS). Rehabilitation aims to regain symmetrical knee strength and function to minimize the risk of a second ACL injury after RTS. Purpose: To determine the effect of absolute quadriceps and hamstring strength, normalized by body weight, on the risk of a second ACL injury during the first 2 years after RTS in patients who have undergone ACL reconstruction (ACLR). Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Data from patients after index ACLR at the time of RTS were extracted from a rehabilitation registry—Project ACL. Patients who had performed isokinetic tests for quadriceps and hamstring strength and hop tests before RTS were included. The endpoint was a second ACL injury or a follow-up of 2 years after RTS after ACLR. Results: A total of 835 patients (46% women), with a mean age of 23.9 ± 7.7 years, were included. During the study period, 69 (8.3%) second ACL injuries (ipsilateral and contralateral) occurred. Greater relative quadriceps strength in the injured leg increased the risk of a second ACL injury (relative risk [RR], 1.69 [95% CI, 1.05-2.74]; P = .032). In patients who had recovered symmetrical quadriceps strength (limb symmetry index ≥90%), there was no effect of quadriceps strength on the risk of second ACL injury (RR, 1.33 [95% CI, 0.69-2.56]; P = .39). Quadriceps strength on the healthy side or hamstring strength, regardless of side, had no effect on the risk of a second ACL injury. Conclusion: Greater relative quadriceps strength in the injured leg at the time of RTS after ACLR was associated with an increased risk of a second ACL injury. There was no effect of relative quadriceps strength on the risk of a second ACL injury in patients who had recovered symmetrical quadriceps strength.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.