ArticleInternational journal of sports physical therapy2023
No Effect of Return to Sport Test Batteries with and without Psychological PROs on the Risk of a Second ACL Injury: A Critical Assessment of Four Different Test Batteries.
Article in International journal of sports physical therapy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hop Test Performance is Associated with Return-to-Sport but Shows Limited Association with Reinjury after Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of sports science & medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Decision-making in return to sport clearance after ACL reconstruction is primarily based on objective criteria: Insights from AGA knee experts.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Patients report psychological barriers as important when returning to sport, however, psychological outcome measures are seldom included in return to sport (RTS) assessment. There is a need for clinical trials to integrate psychological patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in return to sport batteries assessing patients treated with ACL reconstruction. Objective: The aim of this study was to determine the association between passing clinical tests of muscle function and psychological PROs and sustaining a second ACL injury in patients who RTS after primary ACL reconstruction. Design: Retrospective Cohort study. Methods: Patients' sex, age, height and weight, and the results of strength and hop tests, as well as answers to PRO's (including Tegner activity scale, the ACL Return to Sport after Injury scale (ACL-RSI) as well as the Quality of Life (QoL) subscale of the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [KOOS]), were extracted from a rehabilitation-specific registry. Four different test batteries comprising muscle function tests and PROs were created to assess whether patients were ready to RTS. Passing each of the test batteries (yes/no) was used as an independent variable. A multivariable Cox proportional hazard model analysis was performed, with sustaining a second ACL injury (either ipsi- or contralateral; yes/no) within two years of RTS as the dependent variable. Results: A total of 419 patients (male, n=214; 51%) were included, of which 51 (12.2%) suffered a second ACL injury within the first two years after RTS. There were no differences in passing rates in the different RTS test batteries comprising muscle function tests and PROs for patients who suffered a second ACL injury compared to patients who did not. Conclusion: No association between passing the RTS clinical tests batteries comprising muscle function and psychological PROs used, and the risk of a second ACL injury could be found. Level of Evidence: 3©The Author(s).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.