The Effects of Early Aggressive Rehabilitation on Outcomes After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Autologous Hamstring Tendon: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Abstract

No differences were found between early aggressive and nonaggressive rehabilitation after an isolated ACL-R using STG autografts for the primary outcomes of A-P knee laxity and subjective IKDC score. In addition, no differences were observed for secondary outcomes between groups for differences in ROM and PIF values.

What Can the First 2 Months Tell Us About Outcomes After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction?

“…Postoperative variables collected were the IKDC Subjective Knee Evaluation Form score, unilateral PIF, and knee flexionextension ROM. All patients participated in a standard 4-phase rehabilitation protocol 28 at the same facility. Phase 1 (0 to 4 weeks) of the rehabilitation protocol consisted of passive, active-assist, and active ROM exercises; weight bearing as tolerated (axillary crutches as needed); stationary bicycling; muscle-activation exercises; and inflammation reduction.…”

A scoping review of the resources needed to deliver anterior cruciate ligament physiotherapy rehabilitation in randomised controlled trials

“…One paper was then excluded as it did not meet inclusion criteria, 13 were included based on additional information provided, and therefore 14 studies were included for analysis. Three included studies did not find the intervention to be more effective than the comparator but were included because the care was still effective in both arms so they met the inclusion criteria of 'effective' modes of rehabilitation [32][33][34]. Christensen et al and Moller et al show both arms to be equally effective where patients are seen to be equal to (at two year follow up) [33], or improve relative to (at 24 week follow up) [34], known normative values of the Lysholm, Tegner and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Score [35,36].…”

“…Three included studies did not find the intervention to be more effective than the comparator but were included because the care was still effective in both arms so they met the inclusion criteria of 'effective' modes of rehabilitation [32][33][34]. Christensen et al and Moller et al show both arms to be equally effective where patients are seen to be equal to (at two year follow up) [33], or improve relative to (at 24 week follow up) [34], known normative values of the Lysholm, Tegner and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Score [35,36]. Comparisons to normative functional data are significantly limited by the 12 week follow for Baltaci et al who compared to the 'uninvolved limb' of the participant at all-time points to illustrate effectiveness [32].…”

Особливості Розробки Критерій-Орієнтованої Програми Реабілітації Для Хворих Після Артроскопічної Реконструкції Передньої Хрестоподібної Зв’язки

“…Аналіз програм реабілітації, що існують у більшості провідних центрів світу, показав орієнтацію їх на терміни післяоперативного втручання, а їх тривалість часто залежала від особистого досвіду лікарів цих центрів -від досить тривалої (понад 9 місяців) до так званої агресивної (менше 4 місяців) [6,12]. Існує і ряд більш поміркованих програм (тривалістю 6 місяців) [8]. На наш погляд, саме період 6 місяців після оперативного лікування є достатнім для повернення більшості хворих до бажаного рівня активності після проведеного оперативного втручання.…”