| Autor: |
Syed RIB; Doctoral School of Clinical Medicine, Semmelweis University, 1085 Budapest, Hungary., Hangody LR; Department of Traumatology, Semmelweis University, 1085 Budapest, Hungary., Frischmann G; Biomechanics Lab, TSO Medical Hungary Kft., 1118 Budapest, Hungary., Kós P; Biomechanics Lab, TSO Medical Hungary Kft., 1118 Budapest, Hungary., Kopper B; Department of Biomechanics, Hungarian University of Sports Science, 1123 Budapest, Hungary., Berkes I; Doctoral School of Clinical Medicine, Semmelweis University, 1085 Budapest, Hungary.; Department of Traumatology, Semmelweis University, 1085 Budapest, Hungary.; Department of Health Sciences and Sport Medicine, Hungarian University of Sports Science, 1123 Budapest, Hungary. |
| Abstrakt: |
Background: After the increasingly common anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) procedure in competitive athletes, rehabilitation is crucial for facilitating a timely return to sports (RTS) and preventing re-injury. This pilot study investigates the patient-reported outcomes of postoperative rehabilitation in competitive athletes, comparing supervised rehabilitation (SVR) and home-based rehabilitation (HBR). Methods: After ACLR, 60 (out of 74 screened) athletes were recruited and equally divided into HBR and SVR groups using non-probability convenience sampling, with each group comprising 15 males and 15 females. The rehabilitation outcomes in the respective groups were evaluated at 8 months using measures (Tegner Activity Scale [TAS], International Knee Documentation Committee subjective knee form [IKDC-SKF], ACL Return to Sport after Injury [ACL-RSI]) and objective parameters (isometric muscle strength, hamstring/quadricep asymmetry). RTS was evaluated at 9 months, with ACL re-injury rates recorded approximately 6 months post-RTS. Results: Both groups exhibited decreased TAS scores (HBR: 8 to 6, SVR: 8 to 7), with the SVR group demonstrating superior postoperative IKDC-SKF scores (81.82 vs. 68.43) and lower ACL-RSI scores (49.46 vs. 55.25). Isometric and isokinetic muscle strength, along with asymmetry values, was higher in the SVR group 8 months post-ACLR ( p < 0.05). The SVR group showed a higher RTS rate to the same level (76.6% vs. 53.3%), while the re-injury rate was the same in both the rehabilitation groups (3.3%). Conclusions: Although both rehabilitation approaches yielded comparable outcomes, SVR may demonstrate some superior biomechanical improvements in athletes, resulting in a higher RTS rate. However, the psychological outcomes and re-injury rates did not significantly differ between the groups, emphasizing the need to address individual psychological needs during rehabilitation. Further investigation is recommended with a larger sample size to address the differences of gender among competitive athletes. |
