-
International Journal of Environmental... Dec 2021Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) is one of the most concerning injuries for football players. The aim of this review is to investigate the effects of exercise-based...
Exercise-Based Training Strategies to Reduce the Incidence or Mitigate the Risk Factors of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury in Adult Football (Soccer) Players: A Systematic Review.
Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) is one of the most concerning injuries for football players. The aim of this review is to investigate the effects of exercise-based interventions targeting at reducing ACL injury rate or mitigating risk factors of ACL injury in adult football players. Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic search was conducted in CINAHL, Cochrane Library, PubMed, Scopus, SPORTDiscus and Web of Science. Studies assessing the effect of exercise-based interventions in ACL injury incidence or modifiable risk factors in adult football players were included. 29 studies evaluating 4502 male and 1589 female players were included (15 RCT, 8 NRCT, 6 single-arm): 14 included warm-up, 7 resistance training, 4 mixed training, 3 balance, 1 core stability and 1 technique modification interventions. 6 out of 29 studies investigated the effect of interventions on ACL injury incidence, while the remaining 23 investigated their effect on risk factors. Only 21% and 13% studies evaluating risk of injury variables reported reliability measures and/or smallest worthwhile change data. Warm-up, core stability, balance and technique modification appear effective and feasible interventions to be included in football teams. However, the use of more ecologically valid tests and individually tailored interventions targeting specific ACL injury mechanisms are required.
Topics: Adult; Female; Humans; Male; Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries; Athletic Injuries; Core Stability; Incidence; Reproducibility of Results; Risk Factors; Soccer
PubMed: 34948963
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph182413351 -
Sports Medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) Mar 2021Football is the most popular sport among women; however, little is known about the injury profile in this population. This information would help design tailored injury... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Football is the most popular sport among women; however, little is known about the injury profile in this population. This information would help design tailored injury risk mitigation strategies that may make football safer for women.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of epidemiological data of injuries in women´s football.
METHODS
A systematic review following PRISMA guidelines was performed up to January 2020 in PubMed, Web of Science, Sportdiscus and the Cochrane Library databases. Twenty-two studies reporting the incidence of injuries in women football were analysed. Two reviewers independently extracted data (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] for inter-reviewer reliability = 0.87) and assessed study quality using the STROBE statement, GRADE approach, Newcastle Ottawa Scale and Downs and Black assessment tools. Studies were combined in pooled analyses (injury incidence and injury proportion) using a Poisson random effects regression model.
RESULTS
The overall incidence of injuries in female football players was 6.1 injuries/1000 h of exposure. Match injury incidence (19.2 injuries/1000 h of exposure) was almost six times higher than training injury incidence rate (3.5 injuries/1000 h of exposure). Lower extremity injuries had the highest incidence rates (4.8 injuries/1000 h of exposure). The most common types of injuries were muscle/tendon (1.8 injuries/1000 h of exposure) and joint (non-bone) and ligament (1.5 injuries/1000 h of exposure), which were frequently associated with traumatic incidents. Slight/minimal injuries (1-3 days of time loss) were the most common. The incidence rate of injuries during matches in the top five world ranking leagues was higher than the rest of the leagues (19.3 vs 10.7 injuries/1000 h of exposure, respectively). The weighted injury proportion was 1.1 (95% confidence interval = 0.6-1.7) whereby on average players sustained more than one injury per season.
CONCLUSIONS
Female football players are exposed to a substantial risk of sustaining injuries, especially during matches that require the highest level of performance. To markedly reduce overall injury burden, efforts should focus on introducing and evaluating preventative measures that target match specific dynamics to make football players more capable of responding to the challenges that they have to deal with during match play.
REGISTRATION
This systematic review was registered in the PROSPERO international prospective register of systematic reviews (ID = CRD42019118152).
Topics: Female; Humans; Athletic Injuries; Incidence; Reproducibility of Results; Soccer
PubMed: 33433863
DOI: 10.1007/s40279-020-01401-w -
International Journal of Sports Medicine Apr 2023The objective of this systematic review was to identify potential risk factors for injury in CrossFit participants. Embase, Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane, CINAHL,...
The objective of this systematic review was to identify potential risk factors for injury in CrossFit participants. Embase, Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane, CINAHL, Google Scholar, and SportDiscuss databases were all searched up to June 2021. Cohort studies that investigated risk factors for CrossFit injuries requiring medical attention or leading to time loss in sports were included. A best-evidence synthesis was performed combining all the outcomes from prospective cohort studies. From 9,452 publications identified, we included three prospective cohort studies from which two had a low risk of bias and one a high risk of bias. The studies examined 691 participants of whom 172 sustained an injury. There was limited evidence that switching between prescribed and scaled loads during training is associated with increased injury risk and that increased duration of participation is a protective factor for injury. This could mean that novice CrossFit athletes and those increasing their training load should have closer supervision by CrossFit coaches. These risk factors should be considered when developing preventive interventions.
Topics: Humans; Athletic Injuries; Prospective Studies; Sports; Risk Factors; Athletes
PubMed: 36174660
DOI: 10.1055/a-1953-6317 -
Journal of Integrative and... Dec 2022Systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of Manual therapy and related interventions in the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) based on Boston... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of Manual therapy and related interventions in the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) based on Boston carpal tunnel questionnaire. Systematic review and meta-analysis. Carpal tunnel syndrome. Manual therapy and related interventions versus other therapies or manual therapy and related interventions plus other therapies versus other therapies. Boston carpal tunnel questionnaire. A total of 6 studies were included, including 211 cases in the manual therapy group and 211 cases in the control group. The quality of the included articles was high, and the results of meta-analysis showed that manual therapy and related interventions were superior in terms of improving the Boston carpal tunnel questionnaire Symptom Severity score in patients with CTS (standardised mean difference [SMD] -1.13, 95% CI -1.40 to -0.87), were superior to control groups in terms of improving the Boston carpal tunnel questionnaire functional capacity scale in patients with CTS (SMD -1.01,95% CI -1.24 to -0.77). The results of this meta-analysis suggested that manual therapy and related interventions were better than control groups in treating CTS. Manual therapy and related interventions could relieve the symptoms of patients with CTS and promote the recovery of hand function. Manual therapy and related interventions should be considered clinically effective methods for treating CTS. The protocol was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; No. CRD 42020201389). Manual therapy and related interventions could relieve the symptoms of patients with CTS and promote the recovery of hand function. Manual therapy and related interventions should be considered clinically effective methods for treating CTS.
Topics: Humans; Boston; Carpal Tunnel Syndrome; Musculoskeletal Manipulations
PubMed: 35895497
DOI: 10.1089/jicm.2022.0542 -
Radiology Jul 2022Background Patients with fractures are a common emergency presentation and may be misdiagnosed at radiologic imaging. An increasing number of studies apply artificial... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Background Patients with fractures are a common emergency presentation and may be misdiagnosed at radiologic imaging. An increasing number of studies apply artificial intelligence (AI) techniques to fracture detection as an adjunct to clinician diagnosis. Purpose To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the diagnostic performance in fracture detection between AI and clinicians in peer-reviewed publications and the gray literature (ie, articles published on preprint repositories). Materials and Methods A search of multiple electronic databases between January 2018 and July 2020 (updated June 2021) was performed that included any primary research studies that developed and/or validated AI for the purposes of fracture detection at any imaging modality and excluded studies that evaluated image segmentation algorithms. Meta-analysis with a hierarchical model to calculate pooled sensitivity and specificity was used. Risk of bias was assessed by using a modified Prediction Model Study Risk of Bias Assessment Tool, or PROBAST, checklist. Results Included for analysis were 42 studies, with 115 contingency tables extracted from 32 studies (55 061 images). Thirty-seven studies identified fractures on radiographs and five studies identified fractures on CT images. For internal validation test sets, the pooled sensitivity was 92% (95% CI: 88, 93) for AI and 91% (95% CI: 85, 95) for clinicians, and the pooled specificity was 91% (95% CI: 88, 93) for AI and 92% (95% CI: 89, 92) for clinicians. For external validation test sets, the pooled sensitivity was 91% (95% CI: 84, 95) for AI and 94% (95% CI: 90, 96) for clinicians, and the pooled specificity was 91% (95% CI: 81, 95) for AI and 94% (95% CI: 91, 95) for clinicians. There were no statistically significant differences between clinician and AI performance. There were 22 of 42 (52%) studies that were judged to have high risk of bias. Meta-regression identified multiple sources of heterogeneity in the data, including risk of bias and fracture type. Conclusion Artificial intelligence (AI) and clinicians had comparable reported diagnostic performance in fracture detection, suggesting that AI technology holds promise as a diagnostic adjunct in future clinical practice. Clinical trial registration no. CRD42020186641 © RSNA, 2022 See also the editorial by Cohen and McInnes in this issue.
Topics: Algorithms; Artificial Intelligence; Fractures, Bone; Humans; Sensitivity and Specificity
PubMed: 35348381
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.211785 -
BMJ Open May 2021To systematically review and summarise the evidence for the effects of neuromuscular training compared with any other therapy (conventional training/sham) on knee...
OBJECTIVE
To systematically review and summarise the evidence for the effects of neuromuscular training compared with any other therapy (conventional training/sham) on knee proprioception following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury.
DESIGN
Systematic Review.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, AMED, Scopus and Physical Education Index were searched from inception to February 2020.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials investigating the effects of neuromuscular training on knee-specific proprioception tests following a unilateral ACL injury were included.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Two reviewers independently screened and extracted data and assessed risk of bias of the eligible studies using the Cochrane risk of bias 2 tool. Overall certainty in evidence was determined using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) tool.
RESULTS
Of 2706 articles retrieved, only 9 RCTs, comprising 327 individuals with an ACL reconstruction (ACLR), met the inclusion criteria. Neuromuscular training interventions varied across studies: whole body vibration therapy, Nintendo-Wii-Fit training, balance training, sport-specific exercises, backward walking, etc. Outcome measures included joint position sense (JPS; n=7), thresholds to detect passive motion (TTDPM; n=3) or quadriceps force control (QFC; n=1). Overall, between-group mean differences indicated inconsistent findings with an increase or decrease of errors associated with JPS by ≤2°, TTDPM by ≤1.5° and QFC by ≤6 Nm in the ACLR knee following neuromuscular training. Owing to serious concerns with three or more GRADE domains (risk of bias, inconsistency, indirectness or imprecision associated with the findings) for each outcome of interest across studies, the certainty of evidence was very low.
CONCLUSIONS
The heterogeneity of interventions, methodological limitations, inconsistency of effects (on JPS/TTDPM/QFC) preclude recommendation of one optimal neuromuscular training intervention for improving proprioception following ACL injury in clinical practice. There is a need for methodologically robust RCTs with homogenous populations with ACL injury (managed conservatively or with reconstruction), novel/well-designed neuromuscular training and valid proprioception assessments, which also seem to be lacking.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42018107349.
Topics: Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries; Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction; Humans; Knee Joint; Proprioception; Range of Motion, Articular
PubMed: 34006560
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-049226 -
British Journal of Sports Medicine Dec 2022Critically appraise and summarise the measurement properties of knee muscle strength tests after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and/or meniscus injury using the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Measurement properties for muscle strength tests following anterior cruciate ligament and/or meniscus injury: What tests to use and where do we need to go? A systematic review with meta-analyses for the OPTIKNEE consensus.
OBJECTIVES
Critically appraise and summarise the measurement properties of knee muscle strength tests after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and/or meniscus injury using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments Risk of Bias checklist.
DESIGN
Systematic review with meta-analyses. The modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation-guided assessment of evidence quality.
DATA SOURCES
Medline, Embase, CINAHL and SPORTSDiscus searched from inception to 5 May 2022.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES
Studies evaluating knee extensor or flexor strength test reliability, measurement error, validity, responsiveness or interpretability in individuals with ACL and/or meniscus injuries with a mean injury age of ≤30 years.
RESULTS
Thirty-six studies were included involving 31 different muscle strength tests (mode and equipment) in individuals following an ACL injury and/or an isolated meniscus injury. Strength tests were assessed for reliability (n=8), measurement error (n=7), construct validity (n=27) and criterion validity (n=7). Isokinetic concentric extensor and flexor strength tests were the best rated with sufficient intrarater reliability (very low evidence quality) and construct validity (moderate evidence quality). Isotonic extensor and flexor strength tests showed sufficient criterion validity, while isometric extensor strength tests had insufficient construct and criterion validity (high evidence quality).
CONCLUSION
Knee extensor and flexor strength tests of individuals with ACL and/or meniscus injury lack evidence supporting their measurement properties. There is an urgent need for high-quality studies on these measurement properties. Until then, isokinetic concentric strength tests are most recommended, with isotonic strength tests a good alternative.
Topics: Humans; Adult; Anterior Cruciate Ligament; Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction; Reproducibility of Results; Consensus; Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries; Muscle Strength; Meniscus
PubMed: 36113973
DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2022-105498 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2022Improving mobility outcomes after hip fracture is key to recovery. Possible strategies include gait training, exercise and muscle stimulation. This is an update of a... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Improving mobility outcomes after hip fracture is key to recovery. Possible strategies include gait training, exercise and muscle stimulation. This is an update of a Cochrane Review last published in 2011.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effects (benefits and harms) of interventions aimed at improving mobility and physical functioning after hip fracture surgery in adults.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, trial registers and reference lists, to March 2021.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised or quasi-randomised trials assessing mobility strategies after hip fracture surgery. Eligible strategies aimed to improve mobility and included care programmes, exercise (gait, balance and functional training, resistance/strength training, endurance, flexibility, three-dimensional (3D) exercise and general physical activity) or muscle stimulation. Intervention was compared with usual care (in-hospital) or with usual care, no intervention, sham exercise or social visit (post-hospital).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Members of the review author team independently selected trials for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We used the assessment time point closest to four months for in-hospital studies, and the time point closest to the end of the intervention for post-hospital studies. Critical outcomes were mobility, walking speed, functioning, health-related quality of life, mortality, adverse effects and return to living at pre-fracture residence.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 40 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with 4059 participants from 17 countries. On average, participants were 80 years old and 80% were women. The median number of study participants was 81 and all trials had unclear or high risk of bias for one or more domains. Most trials excluded people with cognitive impairment (70%), immobility and/or medical conditions affecting mobility (72%). In-hospital setting, mobility strategy versus control Eighteen trials (1433 participants) compared mobility strategies with control (usual care) in hospitals. Overall, such strategies may lead to a moderate, clinically-meaningful increase in mobility (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.10 to 0.96; 7 studies, 507 participants; low-certainty evidence) and a small, clinically meaningful improvement in walking speed (CI crosses zero so does not rule out a lack of effect (SMD 0.16, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.37; 6 studies, 360 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Mobility strategies may make little or no difference to short-term (risk ratio (RR) 1.06, 95% CI 0.48 to 2.30; 6 studies, 489 participants; low-certainty evidence) or long-term mortality (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.48 to 3.12; 2 studies, 133 participants; low-certainty evidence), adverse events measured by hospital re-admission (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.11; 4 studies, 322 participants; low-certainty evidence), or return to pre-fracture residence (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.56; 2 studies, 240 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether mobility strategies improve functioning or health-related quality of life as the certainty of evidence was very low. Gait, balance and functional training probably causes a moderate improvement in mobility (SMD 0.57, 95% CI 0.07 to 1.06; 6 studies, 463 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There was little or no difference in effects on mobility for resistance training. No studies of other types of exercise or electrical stimulation reported mobility outcomes. Post-hospital setting, mobility strategy versus control Twenty-two trials (2626 participants) compared mobility strategies with control (usual care, no intervention, sham exercise or social visit) in the post-hospital setting. Mobility strategies lead to a small, clinically meaningful increase in mobility (SMD 0.32, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.54; 7 studies, 761 participants; high-certainty evidence) and a small, clinically meaningful improvement in walking speed compared to control (SMD 0.16, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.29; 14 studies, 1067 participants; high-certainty evidence). Mobility strategies lead to a small, non-clinically meaningful increase in functioning (SMD 0.23, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.36; 9 studies, 936 participants; high-certainty evidence), and probably lead to a slight increase in quality of life that may not be clinically meaningful (SMD 0.14, 95% CI -0.00 to 0.29; 10 studies, 785 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Mobility strategies probably make little or no difference to short-term mortality (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.49 to 2.06; 8 studies, 737 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Mobility strategies may make little or no difference to long-term mortality (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.37; 4 studies, 588 participants; low-certainty evidence) or adverse events measured by hospital re-admission (95% CI includes a large reduction and large increase, RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.42; 2 studies, 206 participants; low-certainty evidence). Training involving gait, balance and functional exercise leads to a small, clinically meaningful increase in mobility (SMD 0.20, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.36; 5 studies, 621 participants; high-certainty evidence), while training classified as being primarily resistance or strength exercise may lead to a clinically meaningful increase in mobility measured using distance walked in six minutes (mean difference (MD) 55.65, 95% CI 28.58 to 82.72; 3 studies, 198 participants; low-certainty evidence). Training involving multiple intervention components probably leads to a substantial, clinically meaningful increase in mobility (SMD 0.94, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.34; 2 studies, 104 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We are uncertain of the effect of aerobic training on mobility (very low-certainty evidence). No studies of other types of exercise or electrical stimulation reported mobility outcomes.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Interventions targeting improvement in mobility after hip fracture may cause clinically meaningful improvement in mobility and walking speed in hospital and post-hospital settings, compared with conventional care. Interventions that include training of gait, balance and functional tasks are particularly effective. There was little or no between-group difference in the number of adverse events reported. Future trials should include long-term follow-up and economic outcomes, determine the relative impact of different types of exercise and establish effectiveness in emerging economies.
Topics: Aged, 80 and over; Exercise; Exercise Therapy; Female; Hip Fractures; Humans; Male; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Resistance Training; Walking
PubMed: 36070134
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001704.pub5 -
British Journal of Anaesthesia Nov 2022We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of contemporary RCTs to determine the clinical effectiveness of spinal vs general anaesthesia (SA vs GA) in patients... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Clinical effectiveness and safety of spinal anaesthesia compared with general anaesthesia in patients undergoing hip fracture surgery using a consensus-based core outcome set and patient-and public-informed outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
BACKGROUND
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of contemporary RCTs to determine the clinical effectiveness of spinal vs general anaesthesia (SA vs GA) in patients undergoing hip fracture surgery using a consensus-based core outcome set, and outcomes defined as important by patient and public involvement (PPI) initiatives.
METHODS
RCTs comparing any of the core outcomes (mortality, time from injury to surgery, acute coronary syndrome, hypotension, acute kidney injury, delirium, pneumonia, orthogeriatric input, being out of bed at day 1 postoperatively, and pain) or PPI-defined outcomes (return to preoperative residence, quality of life, and mobility status) between SA and GA were identified from MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science (2000 to February 2022). Pooled relative risks (RRs) and mean differences (95% confidence intervals [CIs]) were estimated.
RESULTS
There was no significant difference in the risk of delirium comparing SA vs GA (RR=1.07; 95% CI, 0.90-1.29). Comparing SA vs GA, the RR for mortality was 0.56 (95% CI, 0.22-1.44) in-hospital, 1.07 (95% CI, 0.52-2.23) at 30 days, and 1.08 (95% CI, 0.55-2.12) at 90 days. Spinal anaesthesia reduced the risk of acute kidney injury compared with GA: RR=0.59 (95% CI, 0.39-0.89). There were no significant differences in the risk of other outcomes. Few studies reported PPI-defined outcomes, with most studies reporting on one to three core outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
Except for acute kidney injury, there were no differences between SA and GA in hip fracture surgery when using a consensus-based core outcome set and patient and public involvement-defined outcomes. Most studies reported limited outcomes from the core outcome set, and few reported outcomes important to patients, which should be considered when designing future RCTs.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION
CRD42021275206.
Topics: Humans; Anesthesia, Spinal; Consensus; Quality of Life; Postoperative Complications; Anesthesia, General; Hip Fractures; Treatment Outcome; Delirium; Acute Kidney Injury; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36270701
DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2022.07.031 -
British Journal of Sports Medicine May 2020To summarise recommendations and appraise the quality of international clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for rehabilitation after ACL reconstruction.
How should clinicians rehabilitate patients after ACL reconstruction? A systematic review of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) with a focus on quality appraisal (AGREE II).
OBJECTIVES
To summarise recommendations and appraise the quality of international clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for rehabilitation after ACL reconstruction.
DESIGN
Systematic review of CPGs (PROSPERO number: CRD42017020407).
DATA SOURCES
Pubmed, EMBASE, Cochrane, SPORTDiscus, PEDro and grey literature databases were searched up to 30 September 2018.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
English-language CPGs on rehabilitation following ACL reconstruction that used systematic search of evidence to formulate recommendations.
METHODS
We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to report the systematic review. Two appraisers used the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument to report comprehensiveness, consistency and quality of CPGs. We summarised recommendations for rehabilitation after ACL reconstruction.
RESULTS
Six CPGs with an overall median AGREE II total score of 130 points (out of 168) and median overall quality of 63% were included. One CPG had an overall score below the 50% (poor quality score) and two CPGs scored above 80% (higher quality score). The lowest domain score was 'applicability' (can clinicians implement this in practice?) (29%) and the highest 'scope and purpose' (78%) and 'clarity of presentation' (75%). CPGs recommended immediate knee mobilisation and strength/neuromuscular training. Early full weight-bearing exercises, early open and closed kinetic-chain exercises, cryotherapy and neuromuscular electrostimulation may be used according individual circumstances. The CPGs recommend against continuous passive motion and functional bracing.
CONCLUSION
The quality of the CPGs in ACL postoperative rehabilitation was good, but all CPGs showed poor applicability. Immediate knee mobilisation and strength/neuromuscular training should be used. Continuous passive motion and functional bracing should be eschewed.
Topics: Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries; Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction; Cryotherapy; Early Ambulation; Electric Stimulation Therapy; Exercise Therapy; Humans; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Range of Motion, Articular; Resistance Training
PubMed: 31175108
DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2018-100310