Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22314862›Full record

Trial reportKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2012

Variability in leg muscle power and hop performance after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Roland Thomeé, Camille Neeter, Alexander Gustavsson, Pia Thomeé, Jesper Augustsson, Bengt Eriksson, Jon Karlsson

Registry-linked trialAbstract readClinical Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02760589 (Clinical Evaluation After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Tears), which is not on this map. Cited by 90 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
90citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT02760589 completednot on this mapstarted 2015, after this paper: background citation

Clinical Evaluation After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Tears (Internal Brace Technique vs. ACL Reconstruction vs. Conservative Treatment) With Special Regard to Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Functional Performance

TypeobservationalSponsorAUVARan2015 to 2017Enrolled92ConditionsAnterior Cruciate Ligament Tear
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

90 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Documentation of strength training for research purposes after ACL reconstruction.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2013
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

30 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Roland ThomeéLundberg Laboratory for Orthopaedic Research, Department of Orthopaedics, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg University, 413 45 Göteborg, Sweden. roland.thomee@orthop.gu.se
Camille Neeter
Alexander Gustavsson
Pia Thomeé
Jesper Augustsson
Bengt Eriksson
Jon Karlsson

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe purpose of this prospective study was to describe the variability in leg muscle power and hop performance up to 2 years among patients following ACL reconstruction and specifically to illustrate the effects of various criteria for an acceptable level of muscle function.

methodsEighty-two patients (56 men and 26 women)with a mean age of 28 years, who underwent ACL reconstruction using either hamstring tendons (n = 46) or a patellar tendon (n = 36), were assessed pre-operatively and 3, 6, 12 and 24 months post-surgery with a battery of three lower extremity muscle power tests and a battery of three hop tests.

resultsLeg symmetry index (LSI) values at group level ranged between 73 and 100% at all follow-ups. When the tests were evaluated individually, patients reached an average LSI of ≥ 90% at 24 months. The success rate at 24 months for the muscle power test battery, that is,patients with an LSI of ≥ 90% in all three tests, was 48 and 44% for the hop test battery. The success rate at 24 months for both test batteries on all six muscle function tests was 22%. The criterion of an LSI of ≥ 80% resulted in 53% of the patients having an acceptable level on all six tests,while with a criterion of an LSI of ≥ 100%, none of the patients reached an acceptable level.

conclusionAt group level and in single muscle function tests, the muscle function outcome 1 and 2 years after ACL reconstruction is satisfactory in the present study and on a par with the results presented in the literature. However,when using more demanding criteria for a successful muscle function outcome, using batteries of tests or increasing the acceptable LSI level from ≥ 90% to ≥ 95%or ≥ 100%, the results are considered to be poor. It is suggested that this should be taken into consideration when presenting results after ACL rehabilitation, deciding on the criteria for a safe return to sports, or designing rehabilitation programmes after ACL reconstruction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic prospective cohort study, Level I.

Indexed as

Anterior Cruciate Ligament InjuriesMotor SkillsMuscle StrengthAdultAnterior Cruciate LigamentAnterior Cruciate Ligament ReconstructionExercise TestFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansKnee InjuriesLegLinear ModelsMaleProspective StudiesRecovery of Function

Identifiers

PMID22314862

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.