ArticleCureus2024
Reviving Movement and Stability: A Case Series on Different Innovative Rehabilitation Strategies Post-anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Injuries to the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) are frequent and can seriously impair stability and mobility. This study examines rehabilitation outcomes in four patients following ligament reconstruction. Four patients who underwent ACL reconstruction and received different physiotherapy protocols, namely, "Oxford Knee Services," "Mass General Brigham," "Fowler Kennedy Sports Medicine," and "Schlechter Protocol of Youth Sports and Ortho," were included. The study aimed to identify the most effective rehabilitation approach. Demographic data, injury details, clinical examinations, and preoperative investigations were presented. Outcome measures included pain scores, range of motion (ROM), muscle strength, and functional assessments. All the patients showed improvements, but the rate of progress varied. Patient 3 achieved the best results in the ROM, muscle strength, and functional measures. This suggests that individual factors and rehabilitation protocols might influence outcomes. This study highlights the varying impacts of different rehabilitation protocols on the recovery outcomes of the patients' post-ACL reconstruction. Despite all patients showing improvements in pain reduction, ROM, muscle strength, and functional capabilities, the rate of progress and the degree of improvement differed notably among them.
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.