1990
DOI: 10.2106/00004623-199072090-00004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Arthrometric evaluation of knees that have a torn anterior cruciate ligament.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

10
106
1
5

Year Published

1994
1994
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 193 publications
(123 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
10
106
1
5
Order By: Relevance
“…The diagnostic validity of KT arthrometry has been the focus of much scrutiny and some criticism, although the literature is generally supportive [25,[27][28][29][30]. It is important to note that diagnostic sensitivity and specificity vary with the testing protocol, the method of data interpretation, and the diagnostic threshold used.…”
Section: Kt-1000/kt-2000mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The diagnostic validity of KT arthrometry has been the focus of much scrutiny and some criticism, although the literature is generally supportive [25,[27][28][29][30]. It is important to note that diagnostic sensitivity and specificity vary with the testing protocol, the method of data interpretation, and the diagnostic threshold used.…”
Section: Kt-1000/kt-2000mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…ROM of both knees was determined with a goniometer and loss of flexion and extension was determined relative to the uninvolved side. AP laxity was determined with the KT-1000 TM arthrometer (MEDmetric Corp, San Diego, CA, USA) using the manual maximum test, a reportedly discriminating and reliable test to evaluate the side-to-side differences in AP laxity between the knees [3,15,26].…”
Section: Patients and Materialsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Whilst only twelve studies in the present review used a reference standard, eight studies did not use a reference standard, and the remaining thirteen studies did not clarify if a reference standard was used or not (see Question 5 in Table 2). Of the studies that used a reference standard, two studies used the KT-2000 arthrometer [27,28]; one study used both the genucom and the KT-2000 [20]; five studies used knee arthroscopy [19,22,36,40,42]; two studies used both physical examination and arthroscopy [23,41]; and two studies used Magnetic Resonance Imagery (MRI) [9,35]. Although knee arthroscopy was used in five studies, such a procedure is not cost effective [82].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Its sensitivity ranged from 0.50 [23] to 0.97 [16], and its specificity ranged from 0.70 [42] to 0.93 [16]. The wide range in the sensitivity and specificity was justified based on the quality of the conducted studies, the experience of the examiner and the amount of force being utilized in each test [44].…”
Section: The Kt-1000/kt-2000 Arthrometermentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation