0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Relationship Between Quadriceps Strength and Knee Joint Power During Jumping After ACLR

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background:

          Knee joint power is significantly impaired during the propulsive phase of jumping after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR); however, it is currently unknown how quadriceps strength influences knee joint power.

          Purpose:

          To (1) evaluate the relationship between quadriceps strength, joint power, and the percentage contribution of the hip, knee, and ankle joints to total limb power during the propulsive phase of jumping and (2) establish a quadriceps strength cutoff value for maximizing the likelihood of having knee joint power characteristics similar to healthy participants.

          Study Design:

          Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3.

          Methods:

          A total of 75 participants were included in this study—40 patients who underwent ACLR 6 months before (18 females; mean age, 19.3 ± 5.7 years) and 35 healthy controls (HC) (20 females; mean age, 21.5 ± 4.5 years). Participants performed a drop vertical jump and underwent isometric quadriceps strength testing. The peak joint power was calculated as the product of the internal joint moment and joint angular velocity. Pearson product-moment correlations were used to assess the relationship between quadriceps strength and knee joint power. Paired samples t tests were used to quantify differences between limbs. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to determine a quadriceps strength cutoff.

          Results:

          The involved limbs of the ACLR cohort (INV) had significantly lower peak knee joint power and percentage contribution from the knee joint during jumping compared with the uninvolved limbs (NON) and limbs of the controls (INV, 2.5 ± 1.2 W/kg; NON, 4.4 ± 1.5 W/kg; HC, 4.3 ± 1.7 W/kg [ P < .0001]). Quadriceps strength was associated with knee joint power in involved limbs and limbs of controls (INV, r = 0.50; HC, r = 0.60). A quadriceps strength cutoff value of 2.07 N·m/kg had an area under the ROC curve of 0.842, indicating good predictive accuracy.

          Conclusion:

          Athletes at 6 months after ACLR demonstrated knee-avoidant jumping mechanics and had significant reductions in knee joint power on the involved limb. A quadriceps strength cutoff value of 2.07 N·m/kg can help predict which athletes will display knee joint power characteristics similar to those of healthy controls.

          Related collections

          Most cited references47

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Fifty-five per cent return to competitive sport following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis including aspects of physical functioning and contextual factors.

          The aim of this study was to update our original systematic review of return to sport rates following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction surgery.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Limb Symmetry Indexes Can Overestimate Knee Function After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury.

            Study Design Prospective cohort. Background The high risk of second anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries after return to sport highlights the importance of return-to-sport decision making. Objective return-to-sport criteria frequently use limb symmetry indexes (LSIs) to quantify quadriceps strength and hop scores. Whether using the uninvolved limb in LSIs is optimal is unknown. Objectives To evaluate the uninvolved limb as a reference standard for LSIs utilized in return-to-sport testing and its relationship with second ACL injury rates. Methods Seventy athletes completed quadriceps strength and 4 single-leg hop tests before anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) and 6 months after ACLR. Limb symmetry indexes for each test compared involved-limb measures at 6 months to uninvolved-limb measures at 6 months. Estimated preinjury capacity (EPIC) levels for each test compared involved-limb measures at 6 months to uninvolved-limb measures before ACLR. Second ACL injuries were tracked for a minimum follow-up of 2 years after ACLR. Results Forty (57.1%) patients achieved 90% LSIs for quadriceps strength and all hop tests. Only 20 (28.6%) patients met 90% EPIC levels (comparing the involved limb at 6 months after ACLR to the uninvolved limb before ACLR) for quadriceps strength and all hop tests. Twenty-four (34.3%) patients who achieved 90% LSIs for all measures 6 months after ACLR did not achieve 90% EPIC levels for all measures. Estimated preinjury capacity levels were more sensitive than LSIs in predicting second ACL injuries (LSIs, 0.273; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.010, 0.566 and EPIC, 0.818; 95% CI: 0.523, 0.949). Conclusion Limb symmetry indexes frequently overestimate knee function after ACLR and may be related to second ACL injury risk. These findings raise concern about whether the variable ACL return-to-sport criteria utilized in current clinical practice are stringent enough to achieve safe and successful return to sport. Level of Evidence Prognosis, 2b. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2017;47(5):334-338. Epub 29 Mar 2017. doi:10.2519/jospt.2017.7285.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Receiver operating characteristic curve: overview and practical use for clinicians

              Using diagnostic testing to determine the presence or absence of a disease is essential in clinical practice. In many cases, test results are obtained as continuous values and require a process of conversion and interpretation and into a dichotomous form to determine the presence of a disease. The primary method used for this process is the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. The ROC curve is used to assess the overall diagnostic performance of a test and to compare the performance of two or more diagnostic tests. It is also used to select an optimal cut-off value for determining the presence or absence of a disease. Although clinicians who do not have expertise in statistics do not need to understand both the complex mathematical equation and the analytic process of ROC curves, understanding the core concepts of the ROC curve analysis is a prerequisite for the proper use and interpretation of the ROC curve. This review describes the basic concepts for the correct use and interpretation of the ROC curve, including parametric/nonparametric ROC curves, the meaning of the area under the ROC curve (AUC), the partial AUC, methods for selecting the best cut-off value, and the statistical software to use for ROC curve analyses.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Orthop J Sports Med
                Orthop J Sports Med
                OJS
                spojs
                Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine
                SAGE Publications (Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA )
                2325-9671
                31 March 2023
                March 2023
                : 11
                : 3
                : 23259671231150938
                Affiliations
                [* ]Department of Physical Therapy, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky, USA.
                []Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Sports Medicine, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky, USA.
                [3-23259671231150938] Investigation performed at the Department of Physical Therapy, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky, USA
                Author notes
                [*] []Brian Noehren, PT, PhD, Department of Physical Therapy, University of Kentucky, 900 South Limestone Street, Room 204 J Wethington Building, Lexington, KY 40536-0200, USA (email: b.noehren@ 123456uky.edu ).
                Article
                10.1177_23259671231150938
                10.1177/23259671231150938
                10071200
                37025125
                8fcd2c62-bbad-46eb-8ee9-accefb033244
                © The Author(s) 2023

                This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work as published without adaptation or alteration, without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages ( https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).

                History
                : 18 October 2022
                : 2 November 2022
                Categories
                Article
                Custom metadata
                ts3

                anterior cruciate ligament,biomechanics,quadriceps,return to sport

                Comments

                Comment on this article