ArticleBMJ open sport & exercise medicine2026
On-field rehabilitation after anterior cruciate ligament injury in contact team sports: a scoping review of exercises, progression and key principles.
Article in BMJ open sport & exercise medicine, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To map and summarise the existing scientific literature on on-field rehabilitation (OFR) exercises, progression and principles supporting athletes' return to contact team sports after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury. Design: Scoping review. Data sources: PubMed, CINAHL, AMED, Cochrane, SPORTDiscus, PEDro, Scopus and Embase Library were searched in April 2025. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: Sources of any design published between 2010 and 2025 that described or evaluated OFR for athletes returning to contact team sports after ACL injury or reconstruction, following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines; studies involving athletes of any age, sex or competition level were eligible. Results: The search identified 6880 records; 38 sources met the inclusion criteria. Most sources were descriptive and focused predominantly on football, with limited representation of basketball, rugby and ice hockey. OFR was commonly described using multistage (2-5 steps) frameworks progressing from linear running and controlled drills to multidirectional movements, sport-specific skills and practice simulations. Progression was primarily criterion-based rather than time-based, guided by minimal pain or swelling, restored knee range of motion, adequate strength and limb symmetry, and tolerance to running loads. Several articles applied the control-chaos continuum. Collaboration between physiotherapists, coaches and athletes was emphasised, although roles, responsibilities and organisational structures were rarely described. Conclusion: The current OFR literature after ACL injury is largely descriptive, emphasising staged, criterion-based progression and multidisciplinary collaboration. However, actionable guidance on roles, responsibilities and organisational structures is minimal, underscoring the need for empirical studies to establish and evaluate standardised OFR practices. Trial registration number: 10.17605/OSF.IO/T6UN2.
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.