Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32347344›Full record

ArticleKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2020

Return to sport after anterior cruciate ligament injury: Panther Symposium ACL Injury Return to Sport Consensus Group.

Sean J Meredith, Thomas Rauer, Terese L Chmielewski, Christian Fink, Theresa Diermeier, Benjamin B Rothrauff, Eleonor Svantesson, Eric Hamrin Senorski, Timothy E Hewett, Seth L Sherman and 2 more

Abstract readConsensus Statement
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 59 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
59citing papers in PubMed, 2 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

59 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

12 authors.

Sean J MeredithDepartment of Orthopaedics, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. seanjmeredith@gmail.com.
Thomas RauerUPMC Freddie Fu Sports Medicine Center, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, 3200 S Water St, Pittsburgh, 15203, PA, USA.
Terese L ChmielewskiTRIA Orthopaedic Center, Bloomington, MN, USA.
Christian FinkGelenkpunkt-Sports and Joint Surgery Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Theresa DiermeierDepartment of Sportorthopedics, Klinikum rechts der Isar Technische Universitat Munchen, Munchen, Germany.
Benjamin B RothrauffUPMC Freddie Fu Sports Medicine Center, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, 3200 S Water St, Pittsburgh, 15203, PA, USA.
Eleonor SvantessonDepartment of Orthopedics, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Eric Hamrin SenorskiGothenburg Sport Trauma Research Center, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Timothy E HewettHewett Consulting, Minneapolis & Rochester, MN, USA.
Seth L ShermanDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Stanford Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA.
Bryson P LesniakUPMC Freddie Fu Sports Medicine Center, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, 3200 S Water St, Pittsburgh, 15203, PA, USA.
Panther Symposium ACL Injury Return to Sport Consensus Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeA precise and consistent definition of return to sport (RTS) after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury is lacking, and there is controversy surrounding the process of returning patients to sports and their previous activity level. The aim of the Panther Symposium ACL Injury RTS Consensus Group was to provide a clear definition of RTS and description of the RTS continuum, as well as to provide clinical guidance on RTS testing and decision-making.

methodsAn international, multidisciplinary group of ACL experts convened as part of a consensus meeting. Consensus statements were developed using a modified Delphi method. Literature review was performed to report the supporting evidence.

resultsKey points include that RTS is characterized by achievement of the pre-injury level of sport and involves a criteria-based progression from return to participation to return to sport, and ultimately return to performance. Purely time-based RTS decision-making should be abandoned. Progression occurs along a RTS continuum with decision-making by a multidisciplinary group that incorporates objective physical examination data and validated and peer-reviewed RTS tests, which should involve functional assessment as well as psychological readiness. Consideration should be given to biological healing, contextual factors and concomitant injuries.

conclusionThe resultant consensus statements and scientific rationale aim to inform the reader of the complex process of RTS after ACL injury that occurs along a dynamic continuum. Research is needed to determine the ideal RTS test battery, the best implementation of psychological readiness testing and methods for the biologic assessment of healing and recovery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Indexed as

Return to SportAnterior Cruciate Ligament InjuriesAnterior Cruciate Ligament ReconstructionAthletic InjuriesClinical Decision-MakingHumansPhysical ExaminationAnterior cruciate ligamentConsensus statementRehabilitationReturn to sport

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.