Factors associated with additional anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and register comparison: a systematic review on the Scandinavian knee ligament registers

Svantesson, Eleonor; Senorski, Eric Hamrin; Baldari, Angelo; Ayeni, Olufemi R.; Engebretsen, Lars; Franceschi, Francesco; Karlsson, Jón; Samuelsson, Kristian

doi:10.1136/bjsports-2017-098192

Cited by 35 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“… 43 Registries comprise data on large numbers of patients and include multiple follow-up occasions, sometimes over more than a decade. 43 , 103 Hence, they are important sources for determining the effectiveness of ACL treatment and for providing hypotheses-generating results. 104 Nonetheless, a large dropout rate increases the importance of a stringent data reporting, and a statistical analysis of patients lost to follow-up also needs to be considered.…”

Section: Consensus Statements and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical Outcomes After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury: Panther Symposium ACL Injury Clinical Outcomes Consensus Group

Svantesson

Senorski

Webster

et al. 2020

Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A stringent outcome assessment is a key aspect of establishing evidence-based clinical guidelines for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury treatment. To establish a standardized assessment of clinical outcome after ACL treatment, a consensus meeting including a multidisciplinary group of ACL experts was held at the ACL Consensus Meeting Panther Symposium, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA, in June 2019. The aim was to establish a consensus on what data should be reported when conducting an ACL outcome study, what specific outcome measurements should be used, and at what follow-up time those outcomes should be assessed. The group reached consensus on 9 statements by using a modified Delphi method. In general, outcomes after ACL treatment can be divided into 4 robust categories: early adverse events, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), ACL graft failure/recurrent ligament disruption, and clinical measures of knee function and structure. A comprehensive assessment after ACL treatment should aim to provide a complete overview of the treatment result, optimally including the various aspects of outcome categories. For most research questions, a minimum follow-up of 2 years with an optimal follow-up rate of 80% is necessary to achieve a comprehensive assessment. This should include clinical examination, any sustained reinjuries, validated knee-specific PROs, and health-related quality of life questionnaires. In the midterm to long-term follow-up, the presence of osteoarthritis should be evaluated. This consensus paper provides practical guidelines for how the aforementioned entities of outcomes should be reported and suggests the preferred tools for a reliable and valid assessment of outcome after ACL treatment.

show abstract

Section: Consensus Statements and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical Outcomes After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury: Panther Symposium ACL Injury Clinical Outcomes Consensus Group

Svantesson

Senorski

Webster

et al. 2020

Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[1,2] Reaching RTS criteria based on an objective assessment of muscle function (MF) in the lower extremity, prior returning to sport, can reduce the risk of a second ACL injury. [3,4] A proper assessment of MF after ACL injury and reconstruction should comprise measures of quadriceps and hamstring strength as well as measures of functional performance. [5] As an athletic injury always is followed by a psychological response, psychological outcome measures have become more common in the assessment of patients with an ACL injury.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hop tests and psychological PROs provide a demanding and clinician-friendly RTS assessment of patients after ACL reconstruction, a registry study.

Piussi

Beischer

Thomeé

et al. 2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background There is growing interest in assessing psychological well-being in patients after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. It is unknown whether an assessment of psychological outcome in addition to tests of muscle function can facilitate decisions on return to sport. Therefore, the aim was to evaluate different return to sport (RTS) test batteries, comprising both muscle function and psychological outcomes 1 year after ACL. Method In this cross-sectional cohort study a total of 320 patients (51% men) aged 18-65 years were included 1 year after ACL reconstruction. Different muscle function (MF) test batteries consisting of knee extension and flexion strength tests, 3 hop tests, and 2 psychological patient-reported outcomes (PROs); Quality of Life subscale from the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS QoL) and ACL Return to Sport after Injury (ACL-RSI), 1 year after ACL reconstruction. Results Passing rates in the different test batteries varied from 47% for 2 hop tests to 13% for 5 MF tests + 2 PROs. The use of psychological PROs together with tests of muscle function gave the lowest passing rates. There was a very strong correlation between passing 2 hop tests + 2 PROs and passing 5 MF tests as well as passing 5 MF tests + 2 PROs. Conclusion The use of hop tests together with psychological PROs provides a demanding and clinician-friendly RTS test battery for assessment 1 year after ACL reconstruction.

show abstract

“…Consequences associated with a second ACL injury are for instance lower level of physical activity, knee pain and kneejoint osteoarthritis [2,3]. Reaching return to sport (RTS) criteria based on objective assessments of muscle function (MF) in the lower extremity, prior returning to sport, can reduce the risk of a second ACL injury [4,5]. Since a safe RTS after an ACL injury is a milestone for a majority of patients, it recieves much attention [6,7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hop tests and psychological PROs provide a demanding and clinician-friendly RTS assessment of patients after ACL reconstruction, a registry study

Piussi¹,

Beischer

Thomeé

et al. 2020

BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: There is growing interest in assessing psychological well-being in patients after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. It is unknown whether an assessment of psychological outcome in addition to tests of muscle function can facilitate decisions on return to sport (RTS). Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate passing rates in different physical RTS test batteries, with and without the inclusion of psychological outcome measures 1 year after ACL reconstruction. Method: In this cross-sectional cohort study a total of 320 patients (51% men) aged 18-65 years were included 1 year after ACL reconstruction. Passing rates on different muscle function (MF) test batteries (with results presented as Limb Symmetry Index (LSI)), consisting of knee extension and flexion strength tests, 3 hop tests, and 2 psychological patient-reported outcomes (PROs); Quality of Life subscale from the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS QoL) and ACL Return to Sport after Injury (ACL-RSI), were evaluated 1 year after ACL reconstruction. Muscle function test batteries comprised: 2 MF tests (vertical hop and hop for distance; pass = 90% LSI); 2 MF tests and 2 PRO (pass = 90% LSI, 62.5 points on KOOS QoL and 76.6 points on ACL-RSI), 5 MF tests (2 strength and 3 hop tests, pass = 90% LSI), and 5 MF tests and 2 PRO (pass = 90% LSI, 62.5 points on KOOS QoL and 76.6 points on ACL-RSI). Results: Passing rates in the different test batteries were 47% for 2 MF tests, 19% for 2 MF tests and 2 PROs, 29% for 5 MF tests and 13% for 5 MF tests and 2 PROs. The use of psychological PROs together with tests of muscle function gave the lowest passing rate (13%). There was a very strong correlation between passing 2 hop tests and 2 PROs and passing 5 MF tests (rφ = 0.41) as well as passing 5 MF tests and 2 PROs (rφ = 0.79). Conclusion: The use of hop tests together with psychological PROs provides a clinician-friendly RTS test battery for assessment 1 year after ACL reconstruction as the passing rate was 19% when using 2 hop-tests combined with 2 PROs, compared with 29% when using 5 tests of MF requiring advanced testing equipment.

show abstract

Factors associated with additional anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and register comparison: a systematic review on the Scandinavian knee ligament registers

Abstract: The studies published from the Scandinavian registers in general have a high reporting quality when regarded as cohort studies. Several factors are associated with undergoing additional ACL reconstruction. The results from the registers may help facilitate treatment decisions.

Cited by 35 publications

References 48 publications

Clinical Outcomes After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury: Panther Symposium ACL Injury Clinical Outcomes Consensus Group

Clinical Outcomes After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury: Panther Symposium ACL Injury Clinical Outcomes Consensus Group

Hop tests and psychological PROs provide a demanding and clinician-friendly RTS assessment of patients after ACL reconstruction, a registry study.

Hop tests and psychological PROs provide a demanding and clinician-friendly RTS assessment of patients after ACL reconstruction, a registry study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About