SynthesisSports health
Assessment of Landing Stability in Patients After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury and Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Sports health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparative clinical outcomes of monotherapy and combined conservative treatment strategies in lateral epicondylitis: a retrospective cohort study of 420 patients.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextDynamic postural control deficits are prevalent in people with anterior cruciate ligament injury (ACLI) or reconstruction (ACLR). Time to stabilization (TTS) and the dynamic postural stability index (DPSI) are used to assess dynamic postural stability during a jump-landing task. However, results vary on whether landing stability can adequately demonstrate dynamic postural deficits in patients with ACLI and ACLR.
objectiveTo (1) describe common methods and parameters for determining TTS and DPSI, and (2) identify the differences in TTS and DPSI across different jump-landing tasks and directions between the ACLI or ACLR and control groups. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Scopus, CINAHL, and SPORTDiscus were searched for articles from conception until March 2024. STUDY SELECTION: Clinical studies assessing dynamic postural stability between patients with ACLI and ACLR and controls were included. Eleven articles were included in the analysis. STUDY
designSystematic review and meta-analysis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 4. DATA EXTRACTION: The following information was extracted from included articles: demographic data, sample size, methodology, landing stability test outcomes, and calculation methods of outcomes. Different jump tasks were explored, and meta-analyses were conducted on the landing stability test outcomes.
resultsIn forward jump-landing tasks, knees affected by ACLI or ACLR needed more time than controls to achieve stabilization, showing a moderate effect in the anteroposterior direction (based on 2 studies, 47 affected knees versus 44 healthy knees; standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.438), and a large effect in the vertical direction (based on 3 studies, 77 affected knees versus 74 healthy knees; SMD = 0.656).
conclusionThese findings demonstrate impaired dynamic stability in ACLI/ACLR patients, highlighting the importance of TTS as an effective measure for assessing landing stability.
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.