Umeå universitets logga

PURPOSE: Little is known regarding movement strategies in the long term following injury of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL), and even less about comparisons of reconstructed and deficient knees in relation to healthy controls. The present purpose was to compare trunk, hip, and knee kinematics during a one-leg vertical hop (VH) ~20 years post-ACL injury between persons treated with surgery and physiotherapy (ACLR), solely physiotherapy (ACLPT), and controls (CTRL). Between-leg kinematic differences within groups were also investigated.

METHODS: Sixty-six persons who suffered unilateral ACL injury on average 23 ± 2 years ago (32 ACLR, 34 ACLPT) and 33 controls performed the VH. Peak trunk, hip, and knee angles during Take-off and Landing phases recorded with a 3D motion capture system were analysed with multivariate statistics.

RESULTS: Significant group effects during both Take-off and Landing were found, with ACLPT differing from CTRL in Take-off with a combination of less knee flexion and knee internal rotation, and from both ACLR and CTRL in Landing with less hip and knee flexion, knee internal rotation, and greater hip adduction. ACLR also presented different kinematics to ACLPT and CTRL in Take-off with a combination of greater trunk flexion, hip flexion, hip internal rotation, and less knee abduction, and in Landing with greater trunk flexion and hip internal rotation. Further, different kinematics and hop height were found between legs within groups in both Take-off and Landing for both ACL groups, but not for CTRL.

CONCLUSION: Different kinematics for the injured leg for both ACL groups compared to CTRL and between treatment groups, as well as between legs within treatment groups, indicate long-term consequences of injury. Compensatory mechanisms for knee protection seem to prevail over time irrespective of initial treatment, possibly increasing the risk of re-injury and triggering the development of osteoarthritis. Detailed investigation of movement strategies during the VH provides important information and a more comprehensive evaluation of knee function than merely hop height. More attention should also be given to the trunk and hip in clinics when evaluating movement strategies after ACL injury.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prospective cohort study, Level II.

We propose a novel one-leg standardised rebound side-hop test (SRSH) specifically designed for detailed analysis of landing mechanics. Anterior cruciate ligament reconstructed persons (ACLR, n = 30) and healthy-knee controls (CTRL, n = 30) were tested for within-session and test-retest (CTRL only, n = 25) reliability and agreement. Trunk, hip and knee angles and moments in sagittal, frontal, and transversal planes during landing, including time to stabilisation (TTS), were evaluated using intra-class correlations (ICCs), average within-person standard deviations (S_W) and minimal differences. Excellent within-session reliability were found for angles in both groups (most ICCs > 0.90, S_W ≤ 5°), and excellent to good for moments (most ICCs > 0.80, S_W ≤ 0.34 Nm/kg). Only knee internal rotation moment showed poor reliability (ICC < 0.4). Test-retest results were excellent to fair for all angles and moments (ICCs 0.47–0.91, S_W < 5° and ≤ 0.25 Nm/kg), except for peak trunk lateral bending angle and knee internal rotation moment. TTS showed excellent to fair within-session reliability but poor test-retest results. These results, with a few exceptions, suggest promising potential of evaluating landing mechanics during the SRSH for ACLR and CTRL, and emphasise the importance of joint-specific movement control variables in standardised tasks.

Athletes exposed to rapid maneuvers need a high level of dynamic knee stability and robustness, while also controlling whole body movement, to decrease the risk of non‐contact knee injury. The effects of high‐level athletic training on such measures of movement control have not, however, been thoroughly evaluated. This study investigated whether elite athletes (who regularly perform knee‐specific neuromuscular training) show greater dynamic knee robustness and/or different movement strategies than non‐athletic controls, in relation to overall knee function. Thirty‐nine women (19 athletes, 20 controls) performed standardized rebound side hops (SRSH) while a motion capture system synchronized with two force plates registered three‐dimensional trunk, hip, and knee joint angles and moments. Dynamic knee robustness was evaluated using finite helical axis (FHA) inclination angles extracted from knee rotation intervals of 10°, analyzed with independent t tests. Angle and moment curves were analyzed with inferential methods for functional data. Athletes had superior knee function (less laxity, greater hop performances, and strength) but presented similar FHA inclination angles to controls. Movement strategies during the landing phase differed; athletes presented larger (a) hip flexion angles (during 9%‐29% of the phase), (b) hip adduction moments (59%‐99%), (c) hip internal rotation moments (83%‐89%), and (d) knee flexion moments (79%‐93%). Thus, elite athletes may have a greater ability than non‐athletes to keep the knee robust while performing SRSH more efficiently through increased engagement of the hip. However, dynamic knee robustness associated with lower FHA inclination angles still show room for improvement, thus possibly decreasing knee injury risk.

BACKGROUND: Atypical knee joint biomechanics after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) are common. It is, however, unclear whether knee robustness (ability to tolerate perturbation and maintain joint configuration) and whole body movement strategies are compromised after ACLR.

PURPOSE: To investigate landing control after ACLR with regard to dynamic knee robustness and whole body movement strategies during sports-mimicking side hops, and to evaluate functional performance of hop tests and knee strength.

STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study.

METHODS: An 8-camera motion capture system and 2 synchronized force plates were used to calculate joint angles and moments during standardized rebound side-hop landings performed by 32 individuals with an ACL-reconstructed knee (ACLR group; median, 16.0 months after reconstruction with hamstring tendon graft [interquartile range, 35.2 months]) and 32 matched asymptomatic controls (CTRL). Dynamic knee robustness was quantified using a finite helical axis approach, providing discrete values quantifying divergence of knee joint movements from flexion-extension (higher relative frontal and/or transverse plane motion equaled lower robustness) during momentary helical rotation intervals of 10°. Multivariate analyses of movement strategies included trunk, hip, and knee angles at initial contact and during landing and hip and knee peak moments during landing, comparing ACLR and CTRL, as well as legs within groups.

RESULTS: Knee robustness was lower for the first 10° motion interval after initial contact and then successively stabilized for both groups and legs. When landing with the injured leg, the ACLR group, as compared with the contralateral leg and/or CTRL, demonstrated significantly greater flexion of the trunk, hip, and knee; greater hip flexion moment; less knee flexion moment; and smaller angle but greater moment of knee internal rotation. The ACLR group also had lower but acceptable hop and strength performances (ratios to noninjured leg >90%) except for knee flexion strength (12% deficit).

CONCLUSION: Knee robustness was not affected by ACLR during side-hop landings, but alterations in movement strategies were seen for the trunk, hip, and knee, as well as long-term deficits in knee flexion strength.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Knee robustness is lowest immediately after landing for both the ACLR group and the CTRL and should be targeted in training to reduce knee injury risk. Assessment of movement strategies during side-hop landings after ACLR should consider a whole body approach.

We compared knee landing mechanics with presumed relation to risk of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury among three single-leg hop tests and between legs in individuals with unilateral ACL reconstruction. Thirty-four participants (>10 months' post-surgery, 23 females) performed the standardised rebound side hop (SRSH), maximal hop for distance (OLHD) and maximal vertical hop (OLVH). We calculated the following knee outcomes from motion capture and force plate data: finite helical axis inclination angles (approximates knee robustness), frontal and transversal plane angles at initial contact, peak angles of abduction and internal rotation during landing, and peak external moments of flexion, abduction and internal rotation during landing. Repeated-measures MANOVA analysis ('sex' as covariate) confirmed that SRSH induced greater angles and moments, particularly in the frontal plane, compared to OLHD and OLVH. There was between-leg asymmetry for peak knee flexion moment for males during OLHD and OLVH, and for females during SRSH. Our results advocate the SRSH over OLHD and OLVH for assessment of knee landing control to screen for movement patterns potentially related to ACL injury risk. However, clear differences in both knee kinematics and kinetics between OLHD and SRSH motivate the use of both tests to evaluate different aspects of landing control.