ArticleBMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation2026
No differences at return to sport in psychological profiles and results of muscle function tests between females with and without a second ipsilateral or contralateral ACL injury after ACL reconstruction.
Article in BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- 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
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
BACKGROUND/
objectiveTo determine whether psychological response, self-reported knee function and muscle function at return to sport differ between female patients who returned to sport within 12 months after ACL reconstruction (ACL-R) and either did or did not sustain a second ACL injury within 24 months after ACL-R.
methodsThis cohort study included female patients from two Swedish registries, who were between 16 and 40 years old, treated with primary ACL-R between 2014 and 2020, who returned to sport (Tegner ≥ 6) within 12 months from ACL-R, and had at least a 24-month follow-up. The primary focus was comparison of psychological and muscle function profiles at return to sport. Unadjusted comparisons of patient-reported outcomes and muscle function tests at the time of RTS were performed between patients who did and did not sustain a second ipsilateral or contralateral ACL injury during the follow-up period.
resultsA total of 344 female patients were included; 40 (11%) sustained a second ACL injury. No between-groups differences were observed in psychological response or muscle function. For self-reported knee function, females with a second ACL injury reported less severe symptoms (83.8 vs. 78.5, mean difference 5.33, 95% CI 0.68–10.31, ES = 0.37, p = 0.024) compared to females who did not sustain a second ACL injury.
conclusionThere were no differences in psychological response or muscle function between female patients with or without a second ACL injury within 24 months when RTS was achieved within 12 months after primary ACL-R. However, females with a second injury reported slightly less severe symptoms at RTS. Clinically, these findings indicate that the absence of symptoms or psychological concerns at return to sport should not be interpreted as low reinjury risk, and that return-to-sport decisions in female patients may require assessment approaches beyond single time-point patient-reported outcomes or muscle function tests.
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.