Reinjury Anxiety and Return to Sport After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Cluster Analysis and Prospective Study Among 162 Athletes

Abstract

Background: Recent studies have investigated the effect of psychological factors on return to sport (RTS), but none has tested the existence of psychological profiles linked to reinjury anxiety and its links with RTS and reinjury. Purpose: To assess the effect of different psychological profiles on RTS and reinjury. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: The study screened patients who were involved in all types of sports for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (hamstring and patellar tendon autografts). All participants were included during the RTS phase (90-180 days after ACL reconstruction). Reinjury anxiety, fear of reinjury, kinesiophobia, perceived stress, anxiety, depression, knee confidence, self-esteem, optimism, coping, and pain were measured. Hierarchical cluster analysis (Ward method) and analysis of variance were performed. In the second year after surgery, patients were recontacted by telephone to follow-up. RTS and reinjury were compared by profile type. Results: A total of 162 athletes were initially included, of whom 123 responded regarding RTS and reinjury. Cluster analysis showed a 4-cluster solution (χ2[21] = 428.59; λ = .064; P < .001). Profile 1 (27.8%) was characterized by moderate reinjury anxiety and no depression. Profile 2 (22.8%) was characterized by moderate reinjury anxiety and minor anxious-depressive reaction. Profile 3 (30.9%) was characterized by no reinjury anxiety, no depression, and high confidence. Profile 4 (18.5%) was characterized by high anxiety, high depression, and low confidence. Profile 4 had the lowest self-esteem and optimism scores compared with profile 3 ( P < .001). In addition, a higher percentage of men was found in profile 3 as opposed to profile 4 (χ2[3] = 11.35; P < .01). Profile 4 had the highest rate of non-RTS with 54.2% (profile 1: 14.3%, P = .001; profile 2: 25.0%, P = .031; profile 3: 22.2%, P = .011). Finally, patients with profile 3 had a higher risk of reinjury (13.9%) than those with profile 4 (0%) ( P = .047), who had an extremely conservative RTS. Conclusion: The different profiles will affect RTS, but also the risk of reinjury exclusively for profiles 3 and 4. Rehabilitation management will probably require all stakeholders to understand psychological profiles of athletes to develop an on-demand rehabilitation plan.