| Autor: |
van Melick, Nicky, Pronk, Yvette, Nijhuis‐van der Sanden, Maria, Rutten, Sebastiaan, van Tienen, Tony, Hoogeboom, Thomas |
| Předmět: |
|
| Zdroj: |
Journal of Orthopaedic Research; Jan2022, Vol. 40 Issue 1, p117-128, 12p |
| Abstrakt: |
The purposes of this prospective cohort study were (1) to assess if second anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury rate 2 years after ACL reconstruction (ACLR) in those who returned to pivoting sport was associated with meeting (a) quantitative return to sport (RTS) criteria, (b) qualitative RTS criteria, and (c) combined quantitative and qualitative RTS criteria, and (2) to determine why athletes did not return to their preinjury (level of) sport. Athletes after ACLR performed RTS tests immediately before RTS: seven movement quantity (strength and hop test battery) and two movement quality (countermovement jump with LESS score and hop‐and‐hold test) tests. A 2‐year postoperative questionnaire asked for RTS, reasons for not returning to the same (level of) sport and second ACL injuries. One hundred and forty‐four athletes (82%) completed the questionnaire and 97 of them returned to a pivoting sport. Seven of these athletes had a second ACL injury. Meeting the hop test battery RTS criterion (absolute risk reduction 11%; p =.047) and hop‐and‐hold test RTS criterion (absolute risk reduction 15%; p =.031) were both significantly associated with a reduced second ACL injury rate. Meeting combined RTS criteria were not significantly associated with second ACL injury rate. Therefore, RTS tests after ACLR should at least comprise a hop test battery or the hop‐and‐hold test to reduce second ACL injury risk after return to pivoting sport. Also, one‐third of all athletes mentioned fear of reinjury as the main reason for not returning to their preinjury (level of) sport. This psychological component should be taken seriously and discussed during rehabilitation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Databáze: |
Complementary Index |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Plný text