Abstract
Context:
Side-to-side quadriceps strength deficits are linked to hazardous lower extremity mechanics and reduced function at a time when individuals are returned to activity after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. As a result, generalized criteria have emerged in the literature, wherein researchers are recommending that patients be cleared for participation once side-to-side differences in strength are ≤10% of the noninjured limb. Similar recommendations exist for patient-oriented outcomes (ie, self-reported function and hop tests), where deficits of ≤10% are considered ideal at return to activity. It is unclear how many studies actually achieve these clinically recommended results.
Evidence Acquisition:
Articles that reported quadriceps strength deficits as compared to the contralateral limb were collected from peer-reviewed sources available on Medline and Web of Science databases (1990 through August 2014). Search terms included the following: anterior cruciate ligament OR ACL AND muscle weakness, anterior cruciate ligament OR ACL AND strength; return-to-activity AND strength; anterior cruciate ligament OR ACL AND quadriceps.
Study Design:
Clinical review.
Level of Evidence:
Level 4.
Results:
Average side-to-side strength deficits at 6 months postreconstruction were 23% ± 8% (range, 3%-40%), while the average at 12 months postsurgery was found to be 14% ± 6% (range, 3%-28%). The average deficits in self-reported function at 6 months (mean, 14% ± 5%) and 12 months postsurgery (mean, 13% ± 6%) were also found to be >10%. Performance on hop tests was found to be less than optimal at 6 months postsurgery (mean, 11% ± 7%), but improved at 12 months postsurgery (mean, 1.3% ± 2%).
Conclusion:
This review provides an up-to-date account of the typical deficits in strength and patient-oriented outcomes that exist when formalized physical therapy concludes after ACL reconstruction. Based on the studies included, it seems pertinent that researchers and clinicians continue to investigate interventions capable of improving the recovery of quadriceps strength as well as patient-oriented outcomes as the majority of studies report levels that are well below clinical recommendations.
Keywords: asymmetry, isokinetic strength, hop tests, self-reported function
It is well known that anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury results in both short- and long-term disability. In the short term, quadriceps weakness is rampant,49 activity levels decline, and quality of life is reduced.43 Long term, there is evidence that persistent quadriceps dysfunction is a primary modifiable factor that contributes to the onset of osteoarthritis.58 After ACL injury, most patients elect to undergo ACL reconstruction, where aggressive postoperative rehabilitation protocols are often prescribed to mitigate some of the aforementioned disabilities. These rehabilitation programs typically finish between 6 and 12 months postsurgery. At this time, patients are often permitted to return to their activities, whether this is competitive sports or recreational activity. Although clinical decisions for return to sport/activity vary between clinics, generalized criteria have emerged, wherein researchers are recommending that patients be cleared for participation once side-to-side differences in quadriceps strength are equal to or less than 10% of the contralateral noninjured limb.1,12,28,42,52 Similar recommendations exist for self-reported function as well as physical function during performance tasks, where deficits of 10% or less are considered ideal at return to activity.52 Though these recommendations may seem to be conservative in nature, data have shown that side-to-side strength deficits that exceed 10% are associated with decreased self-reported function and lower physical performance.52 Moreover, side-to-side asymmetries in quadriceps strength have been associated with altered knee mechanics that may lead to reinjury.12 Given that quadriceps strength is a factor that can be ameliorated with physical therapy, it would be ideal for clinicians to resolve these persistent strength deficits prior to patients being returned to activity. However, despite the continued focus of emphasizing strength gains post–ACL reconstruction and improvements in rehabilitation techniques, it is unknown how many researchers and clinicians actually achieve this recommended criterion at return to activity. Understanding the status of the current literature is important, as it will help to provide a benchmark regarding the effectiveness of clinicians and researchers to treat those with ACL injury and subsequent reconstruction.
Hence, the purpose of this review is to provide a clear, up-to-date account of the amount of strength deficits that exist in the ACL-reconstructed limb when formalized physical therapy concludes by examining the current literature (years 1990 through August 2014). A secondary objective of this review was to examine the self-reported and physical performance–based measures that are reported at return to activity, as these measures can provide a comprehensive overview of patient-oriented outcomes. For the purposes of this review, return to activity was defined as outcomes reported no less than 6 months and no greater than 12 months post–ACL reconstruction. The 12-month cutoff for return to activity was chosen, as the purpose of this review is to provide a current account of the persistent strength deficits that exist at the conclusion of formalized physical therapy. As such, studies that investigated patients more than 1 year postreconstruction were not included.
Prevalence of Quadriceps Strength Deficits at Return to Activity
Of the 37 studies included in this review,2,4-7,9-11,13,18-20,25-27,30-35,37,40,44-47,52-57,59-62 only 5 studies26,27,33,56,60 met clinical recommendations at 6 months postsurgery, indicating that patients commonly return to activity post–ACL reconstruction with side-to-side quadriceps strength deficits that exceed 10% (Appendix 1, available at http://sph.sagepub.com/content/by/supplemental-data). Strength deficits ranged anywhere from 3% to 40% compared with the noninjured limb, with an average strength deficit of 23% ± 8% reported at 6 months postsurgery.2,4,5,9-11,18,19,26,27,31,32,35,44-46,54,56,59,60,62 Of the 5 studies that met clinical recommendations (ie, side-to-side strength deficits ≤10%),26,27,33,56,60 results were not conclusive as investigators used a wide range of concentric isokinetic velocities to quantify quadriceps strength at return to activity. Notably, in these studies, investigators found that side-to-side strength deficits still persisted at lower isokinetic velocities (60 deg/s), although patients displayed less quadriceps strength asymmetry at higher velocities (120, 180, and 240 deg/s).26,27,33,60
Though the prevalence of quadriceps strength deficits appears to improve with time, side-to-side asymmetries still persisted at 12 months postsurgery,2,4,6,9,13,18,25,32,33,37,52,55,59,60,62 with an average strength deficit of 14% ± 6% (range, 3%-28%; Appendix 1) and with only 9 studies meeting clinical recommendations.2,4,9,13,18,33,53,60,62 Similar to the data reported at 6 months postreconstruction, variations in side-to-side asymmetries were found within the same cohorts when multiple velocities and modes (concentric vs eccentric) of isokinetics were used.2,4,13,33,60
When studies were separated by patellar tendon (PT) and hamstring grafts (semitendinosus gracilis [STG] and semitendinosus [ST]), individuals with patellar tendon grafts had an average side-to-side strength deficit of 25% ± 8% (range, 3%-41%) at 6 months postreconstruction2,4,5,10,11,26,27,31,35,37,40,59,60,62 and 16% ± 6% (range, 3%-28%) at 12 months postsurgery.2,4,6,13,32,37,55,59-61 In comparison, individuals with STG grafts report an average strength deficit of 18% ± 9% (range, 3%-38%) at 6 months4,9,11,18,56,59 and 9% ± 5% (range, 3%-17%) at 12 months postsurgery.4,9,18,59 ST grafts reported an average strength deficit of 19% ± 9% (range, 9%-25%) at 6 months postsurgery2,11,33,62 and 12% ± 4% (range, 8%-21%) at 12 months postreconstruction.2,13,33,62
Prevalence of Self-Reported Deficits at Return to Activity
Self-reported function data at return to activity are presented in Table 1. To be included in this review, studies also had to concurrently report quadriceps strength deficits at return to activity. Of the 9 studies that were included,4,5,13,18,31,40,52,53,59 investigators used a variety of outcome measures to quantify self-reported function including the Cincinnati Knee Score, Lysholm scale, and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective form (Table 1). Briefly, the Cincinnati Knee Score contains 11 functional components and was designed to assess patient symptoms and self-perception of knee function post–ACL injury. Similarly, the 11-point Lysholm scale is commonly used to assess patients’ perceptions of function in activities of daily living and during athletic activity. The IKDC is an 18-item scale used to measure a patient’s ability to perform dynamic tasks, activities of daily living, and symptoms. Importantly, all these scales have been validated and are commonly employed post–ACL reconstruction to assist clinicians and researchers in making return-to-activity decisions.8,24,51
Table 1.
Authors | Year | n | Graft | Intervention | Time Post-ACLr, mo | Outcomes | Deficits, % | Met Clinical Recommendations |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Aune et al4 | 2001 | 37 | STG | 6 | Cincinnati Knee Score | 12.2 | No | |
12 | Cincinnati Knee Score | 12.4 | No | |||||
35 | PT | 6 | Cincinnati Knee Score | 23.7 | No | |||
12 | Cincinnati Knee Score | 22.2 | No | |||||
Beard and Dodd5 | 1998 | 13 | PT | Supervised rehabilitation | 6 | Lysholm | 8 | Yes |
13 | PT | Home rehabilitation | 6 | Lysholm | 10 | Yes | ||
Feller and Webster13 | 2003 | 34 | ST | 8 | IKDC | 25 | No | |
33 | ST | 12 | IKDC | 20 | No | |||
12 | Cincinnati Knee Score | 12.3 | No | |||||
30 | PT | 8 | IKDC | 20 | No | |||
29 | PT | 12 | IKDC | 15 | No | |||
12 | Cincinnati Knee Score | 15.5 | No | |||||
Gobbi et al18 | 2003 | 80 | STG | 12 | Lysholm | 9 | Yes | |
Knezevic et al31 | 2014 | 20 | PT | 6 | IKDC | 16.5 | No | |
Lysholm | 10.6 | No | ||||||
Lepley and Palmieri-Smith40 | 2014 | 54 | PT | 7.24 | IKDC | 19.6 | No | |
Schmitt et al52 | 2012 | 55 | Mixed | 6.85 | IKDC | 15.5 | No | |
Segawa et al53 | 2002 | 62 | Mixed | 12 | Lysholm | 3.4 | Yes | |
Witvrouw et al59 | 2001 | 32 | STG | 6 | Lysholm | 15.1 | No | |
12 | Lysholm | 9.8 | Yes | |||||
17 | PT | 6 | Lysholm | 11.1 | No | |||
12 | Lysholm | 6.5 | Yes |
ACLr, anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction; IKDC, International Knee Documentation Committee Form; PT, patellar tendon; ST, semitendinosus; STG, semitendinosus gracilis.
In this review, only 1 study5 of 5 reported self-reported function deficits that met the criteria of being ≤10% at 6 months postsurgery, whereas 3 studies found acceptable results at 12 months postreconstruction.18,53,59 Specifically, self-reported deficits at 6 months postreconstruction ranged from 8% to 24%, with a mean self-reported deficit of 14% ± 5% reported in this review.4,5,18,52,59 At 12 months postsurgery, self-reported deficits ranged from 3% to 22%, with a mean self-reported deficit of 13% ± 6% reported.4,13,18,53,59 Interestingly, of the studies that found clinically acceptable self-reported function (Table 1),5,18,53,59 2 studies reported concurrent strength deficits that exceeded 10% at return to activity (Appendix 1).5,59 On average across both the 6- and 12-month time points, patients reported worse function on the IKDC scale (mean deficit at 6 months, 19.32 ± 2.4; at 12 months, 17.50 ± 3.5) compared with the Cincinnati Knee Score (mean deficit at 6 months, 13.85 ± 2.3; at 12 months, 15.6 ± 4.6) and Lysholm scale (mean deficit at 6 months, 10.96 ± 5.0; at 12 months, 7.17 ± 2.8).
Prevalence of Physical Performance Deficits at Return to Activity
Similar to the criterion for the self-reported data (Table 1), to be included in Table 2, studies had to concurrently report quadriceps strength deficits at return to activity. Studies included in this table utilized quantitative measures to assess physical performance, including the single-leg hop for distance, triple hop for distance, crossover hop for distance, and 6-m timed hop performance measures.14 The goal of these tests is to hop as far forward as possible while maintaining a controlled landing.52 Distance hopped on the ACL limb is then compared with the contralateral noninjured limb to detect interlimb asymmetry. These tests are commonly used clinically to quantify performance post–ACL surgery and have been shown to have good measurement reliability in patients after ACL reconstruction.14,50
Table 2.
Authors | Year | n | Graft | Intervention | Time Post-ACLr, mo | Outcomes | Deficits, % | Met Clinical Recommendations |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Aune et al4 | 2001 | 37 | STG | 6 | Single-legged hop for distance | 3.9 | Yes | |
12 | Single-legged hop for distance | 3.1 | Yes | |||||
35 | PT | 6 | Single-legged hop for distance | 12.3 | Yes | |||
12 | Single-legged hop for distance | 7.9 | Yes | |||||
Gobbi et al18 | 2003 | 80 | STG | 6 | Single-legged hop for distance | 10 | Yes | |
12 | Single-legged hop for distance | 5 | Yes | |||||
Keays et al26 | 2000 | 31 | PT | 6 | Single-legged hop for distance | 16.3 | No | |
Triple hop | 12.3 | No | ||||||
Keays et al27 | 2001 | 31 | PT | 6 | Single-legged hop for distance | 12.1 | No | |
Triple hop | 10.4 | Yes | ||||||
Knezevic et al31 | 2014 | 20 | PT | 6 | Single-legged hop for distance | 10.9 | No | |
Krych et al35 | 2014 | 100 | PT | No femoral nerve block | 6 | Single-legged hop for distance | 9 | Yes |
Triple hop | 8 | Yes | ||||||
96 | PT | Femoral nerve block | 6 | Single-legged hop for distance | 10 | Yes | ||
Triple hop | 8 | Yes | ||||||
Schmitt et al52 | 2012 | 55 | Mixed | 6.85 | Single-legged hop for distance | 7 | Yes | |
Triple hop | 3 | Yes | ||||||
Crossover | 7 | Yes | ||||||
6-meter timed hop | 3 | Yes | ||||||
Witvrouw et al59 | 2001 | 32 | STG | 6 | Single-legged hop for distance | 18.9 | No | |
12 | Single-legged hop for distance | +14.5 | Yes | |||||
17 | PT | 6 | Single-legged hop for distance | 28.9 | No | |||
12 | Single-legged hop for distance | 8.2 | Yes | |||||
Yosmaoglu et al62 | 2011 | 20 | ST | 6 | Single-legged hop for distance | 22.7 | No | |
12 | Single-legged hop for distance | 8.3 | Yes |
ACLr, anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction; PT, patellar tendon; ST, semitendinosus; STG, semitendinosus gracilis.
At 6 months postreconstruction, 5 of the 9 included studies4,18,26,27,31,35,52,59,62 met clinical criteria defined as performance deficits ≤10% of the noninvolved limb.4,18,27,35,52 This result improved at 12 months postsurgery, wherein all but 2 studies26,31 found limb symmetries ≤10% of the contralateral noninjured limb. Specifically at 6 months postreconstruction, physical deficits ranged from 3% to 29%, with a mean performance deficit of 11% ± 7% reported in this review.4,18,26,27,31,35,52,59,62 While at 12 months postsurgery, studies reported a positive physical performance ranging from 14.5% greater than the noninvolved limb to a 3% deficit with the ACL limb.4,18,26,27,31,35,52,59,62 The mean performance deficit at 12 months was 1.3% ± 2%. Similar to the self-reported data, some studies reported clinically acceptable levels of physical function at return to play, despite displaying strength deficits greater than 10% of the noninvolved limb.4,18,27,35,52,59 Moreover, similar to the isokinetic strength data, when patients were tested with a multitude of hop tests, results between tasks varied.
Clinical Implications
This review emphasizes the notion that patients commonly return to activity with strength deficits that exceed current clinical recommendations (ie, >10% of the contralateral limb). Though these strength deficits improve with time, a majority of patients still display strength asymmetries at 12 months post–ACL reconstruction. Bearing in mind that persistent quadriceps weakness is associated with alterations in pathomechanics that are thought to lead to posttraumatic osteoarthritis3 and is thought to be a contributing factor to reinjury,12 the prevalence of quadriceps weakness at return to activity should raise concern in the rehabilitation community, as strength is a modifiable factor that can be mitigated. Importantly, though this clinical cutoff may seem arbitrary in nature, data have shown that side-to-side strength deficits that exceed 10% are associated with decreased self-reported function and lower physical performance.52 Moreover, patient self-reported function appears to be less than optimal at return to activity (see Table 1), with only 1 study5 in this review reporting clinically acceptable rates of self-perceived function at 6 months post–ACL reconstruction. Last, although this review suggests that patients generally return to activity with adequate levels of physical function, this finding should be interpreted with caution because of the paucity of studies that report physical function at return to activity (see Table 2).
When specifically examining quadriceps strength deficits, patients are able to meet clinical recommendations at higher velocities (120 and 180 deg/s) despite the fact that concurrent strength asymmetries still persist at lower velocities (60 deg/s; Appendix 1).2,4,13,26,34,60 At this point in time, it is not entirely clear why strength deficits are more obvious at lower velocities, although investigators have hypothesized that a reduction of torque in quadriceps strength may be due to alterations in neural activity.22 This discrepancy in quadriceps strength at different velocities promotes the need for clinicians and researchers to evaluate strength at multiple velocities, as strength deficits at varying speeds may go undetected. This recommendation is further supported by recent data from Hsiao et al,22 wherein investigators found alterations in quadriceps strength deficits at varying velocities as well as at isometric angles post–ACL reconstruction. Taking this a step further, it seems reasonable for clinicians to test the quadriceps eccentrically at return to activity, as this is the primary action of the muscle during dynamic sporting activities.36 Notably, only 1 study included both concentric and eccentric strength testing.2 Importantly, though emerging evidence suggests that it is pertinent for clinicians to test the quadriceps using varying isokinetic measures, it is unknown how strength deficits during different isokinetic testing (velocity and mode) extrapolate to functional movement deficits. The best evidence suggests that limb asymmetries detected during isometric (90° angle)12,52 as well as isokinetic testing (60 deg/s, concentric mode)48 are linked to hazardous movement patterns post–ACL reconstruction.
Data from this review also indicate that patellar tendon grafts have a tendency to induce greater strength deficits than hamstring graft types at return to activity. However, this finding should be interpreted with caution, given that this review did not compare results based on a meta-analysis. Notably, several investigations have directly compared the impact of graft type on strength outcomes after ACL reconstruction.4,29,38 There are no consistent data that indicate that one graft type (patellar tendon or hamstring) is superior to the other.
Of the studies that found the best recovery of quadriceps strength results at 6 months postreconstruction,26,27,33,56,60 similarities among rehabilitation protocols were found. Specifically, cryotherapy,56 closed-chain exercises, and restoration of range of motion were emphasized early in the rehabilitation protocol.26,33,56 Furthermore, exercises that focused on quadriceps strengthening were also encouraged, along with the inclusion of exercises that promoted neuromuscular control26 (ie, activities that challenged patient balance, agility, and proprioception). In contrast, studies that achieved less than optimal results at 6 months postreconstruction placed participants in postoperative splints (in full extension),46,59 used a continuous passive motion device,32,46 and delayed the onset of formalized physical therapy to 1 week postsurgery.46 Studies that reported the most favorable quadriceps strength at 6 months postsurgery also had the tendency to report the best quadriceps limb symmetry at 12 months postsurgery,33,60 indicating that early gains in quadriceps strength likely influence outcomes at 1 year postsurgery and that optimizing strength early postsurgery is critical.
Importantly, to quantify quadriceps strength deficits, this review utilized the contralateral, noninjured limb as the “control limb” to compute the quadriceps strength index (ie, [ACL reconstructed limb/contralateral limb] × 100). Though this is a clinically acceptable technique that accounts for strength deficits in the ACL limb, it does not take into account limb dominance or the potential for contralateral strength deficits that are reported after ACL reconstruction.21 Thus, though the quadriceps index calculation can assist in making decisions about return to play, it is an imperfect measure, and clinicians should be aware that there is the potential for the index to underestimate strength deficits.
When the self-reporting measures were assessed, data from this review suggest that patients are returning to activity with levels of function that are below clinical recommendations (>10%). Taken into context with the persistent level of quadriceps weakness that is observed, these data indicate that low levels of physical as well poor physiological readiness are common among individuals at return to activity. Interestingly, of the studies that included self-reported function as an outcome measure, the study that seemingly reported the best self-reported outcomes included a component of “patient advice and counseling” throughout the rehabilitation process.5 Given the importance of providing comprehensive care to patients after a major traumatic injury, the incorporation of counseling alongside the traditional rehabilitation approach seems to be an effective approach to improve patient-oriented outcomes. Another consideration is that although the data included in this review just examined the relationship between the magnitude of quadriceps strength deficits as compared with the noninvolved limb, recent data suggest that other variables of quadriceps force production should also be taken into consideration, as these variables are good indicators of self-reported function. Specifically, Hsieh et al23 found that the rate of quadriceps force production, as well as the time to peak force, is more related to self-perceived function than the absolute magnitude of strength deficits. Furthermore, in some cases, studies that found clinically acceptable levels of self-reported function still reported levels of quadriceps strength that were greater than 10% of the noninvolved limb.5,59 Again, this finding reinforces the need for clinicians and researchers to utilize a multitude of tests and analyses at return to play, as 1 test/data point may not be able to comprehensively examine function.
Finally, although this review indicates that performance on hop tests is within acceptable recommendations at return to activity, few studies included measured these outcomes (9 of 37 studies). Accordingly, these data should be interpreted with caution. Previous work has found that symmetrical quadriceps strength is positively associated with patients that pass return-to-activity criteria,12 as such mitigating strength asymmetries should improve performance during dynamic tasks.
Conclusion
This review provides a current account of the average strength deficits that exist in the ACL-reconstructed limb when formalized physical therapy concludes. Based on the studies included, it seems pertinent that researchers and clinicians continue to investigate rehabilitation strategies capable of improving the recovery of quadriceps strength in the ACL-reconstructed limb as a majority of studies report levels of quadriceps strength that are well below clinical recommendations. Data emerging from our lab41 as well as current literature15-17 indicate that eccentric exercise post–ACL reconstruction is better than traditional concentric exercise at improving the recovery of quadriceps strength. Given the mounting evidence, the incorporation of eccentrics into a rehabilitation program seems like a reasonable next step.39 Along those same lines, it is important for researchers to quantify the magnitude of quadriceps strength deficits that lead to altered mechanics and the potential for reinjury. Establishing these criteria will help to better define our clinical standards as to what level of quadriceps strength asymmetry is acceptable at return to activity. Taken together, this review of the literature indicates that clinical preparation for return to activity is inadequate. Strength, self-reported function, and physical performance improved from 6 to 12 months postreconstruction, suggesting the rationale that longer rehabilitation programs and delayed return to activity would likely be beneficial to patients post–ACL reconstruction.
Supplementary Material
Footnotes
The author reports no potential conflicts of interest in the development and publication of this article.
References
- 1. Adams D, Logerstedt D, Hunter-Giordano A, Axe MJ, Snyder-Mackler L. Current concepts for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a criterion-based rehabilitation progression. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2012;42:601-614. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Anderson JL, Lamb SE, Barker KL, Davies S, Dodd CA, Beard DJ. Changes in muscle torque following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Acta Orthop Scand. 2002;73:546-552. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Andriacchi TP, Mundermann A, Smith RL, Alexander EJ, Dyrby CO, Koo S. A framework for the in vivo pathomechanics of osteoarthritis at the knee. Ann Biomed Eng. 2004;32:447-457. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. Aune AK, Holm I, Risberg MA, Jensen HK, Steen H. Four-strand hamstring tendon autograft compared with patellar tendon-bone autograft for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. A randomized study with two-year follow-up. Am J Sports Med. 2001;29:722-728. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Beard DJ, Dodd CA. Home or supervised rehabilitation following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a randomized controlled trial. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1998;27:134-143. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Beynnon BD, Johnson RJ, Fleming BC, et al. Anterior cruciate ligament replacement: comparison of bone-patellar tendon-bone grafts with two-strand hamstring grafts. A prospective, randomized study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002;84-A:1503-1513. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Bizzini M, Gorelick M, Munzinger U, Drobny T. Joint laxity and isokinetic thigh muscle strength characteristics after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: bone patellar tendon bone versus quadrupled hamstring autografts. Clin J Sport Med. 2006;16:4-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8. Briggs KK, Lysholm J, Tegner Y, Rodkey WG, Kocher MS, Steadman JR. The reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the Lysholm score and Tegner activity scale for anterior cruciate ligament injuries of the knee 25 years later. Am J Sports Med. 2009;37:890-897. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. Burks RT, Crim J, Fink BP, Boylan DN, Greis PE. The effects of semitendinosus and gracilis harvest in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy. 2005;21:1177-1185. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. Cardone C, Menegassi Z, Emygdio R. Isokinetic assessment of muscle strength following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Isokinet Exerc Sci. 2004;12:173-177. [Google Scholar]
- 11. Carter TR, Edinger S. Isokinetic evaluation of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: hamstring versus patellar tendon. Arthroscopy. 1999;15:169-172. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12. Di Stasi SL, Logerstedt D, Gardinier ES, Snyder-Mackler L. Gait patterns differ between ACL-reconstructed athletes who pass return-to-sport criteria and those who fail. Am J Sports Med. 2013;41:1310-1318. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Feller JA, Webster KE. A randomized comparison of patellar tendon and hamstring tendon anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med. 2003;31:564-573. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14. Fitzgerald GK, Lephart SM, Hwang JH, Wainner RS. Hop tests as predictors of dynamic knee stability. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2001;31:588-597. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15. Gerber JP, Marcus RL, Dibble LE, Greis PE, Burks RT, LaStayo PC. Effects of early progressive eccentric exercise on muscle structure after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89:559-570. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16. Gerber JP, Marcus RL, Dibble LE, Greis PE, Burks RT, Lastayo PC. Safety, feasibility, and efficacy of negative work exercise via eccentric muscle activity following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2007;37:10-18. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17. Gerber JP, Marcus RL, Dibble LE, Greis PE, Burks RT, LaStayo PC. Effects of early progressive eccentric exercise on muscle size and function after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a 1-year follow-up study of a randomized clinical trial. Phys Ther. 2009;89:51-59. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18. Gobbi A, Tuy B, Mahajan S, Panuncialman I. Quadrupled bone-semitendinosus anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a clinical investigation in a group of athletes. Arthroscopy. 2003;19:691-699. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19. Gokeler A, Schmalz T, Knopf E, Freiwald J, Blumentritt S. The relationship between isokinetic quadriceps strength and laxity on gait analysis parameters in anterior cruciate ligament reconstructed knees. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2003;11:372-378. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20. Heijne A, Werner S. Early versus late start of open kinetic chain quadriceps exercises after ACL reconstruction with patellar tendon or hamstring grafts: a prospective randomized outcome study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2007;15:402-414. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21. Hiemstra LA, Webber S, MacDonald PB, Kriellaars DJ. Contralateral limb strength deficits after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using a hamstring tendon graft. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2007;22:543-550. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22. Hsiao S-F, Chou P-H, Hsu H-C, Lue Y-J. Changes of muscle mechanics associated with anterior cruciate ligament deficiency and reconstruction. J Strength Cond Res. 2014;28:390-400. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23. Hsieh C-J, Indelicato PA, Moser MW, Vandenborne K, Chmielewski TL. Speed, not magnitude, of knee extensor torque production is associated with self-reported knee function early after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction [published online July 16, 2014]. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 10.1007/s00167-014-3168-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24. Irrgang JJ, Anderson AF, Boland AL, et al. Development and validation of the International Knee Documentation Committee subjective knee form. Am J Sports Med. 2001;29:600-613. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25. Jansson KA, Linko E, Sandelin J, Harilainen A. A prospective randomized study of patellar versus hamstring tendon autografts for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med. 2003;31:12-18. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26. Keays SL, Bullock-Saxton J, Keays AC. Strength and function before and after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2000;(373):174-183. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27. Keays SL, Bullock-Saxton J, Keays AC, Newcombe P. Muscle strength and function before and after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using semitendonosus and gracilis. Knee. 2001;8:229-234. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28. Keays SL, Bullock-Saxton J, Newcombe P, Keays AC. The relationship between knee strength and functional stability before and after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. J Orthop Res. 2003;21:231-237. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29. Keays SL, Bullock-Saxton JE, Keays AC, Newcombe PA, Bullock MI. A 6-year follow-up of the effect of graft site on strength, stability, range of motion, function, and joint degeneration after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: patellar tendon versus semitendinosus and gracilis tendon graft. Am J Sports Med. 2007;35:729-739. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30. Knezevic OM, Mirkov DM, Kadija M, Milovanovic D, Jaric S. Evaluation of isokinetic and isometric strength measures for monitoring muscle function recovery after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. J Strength Cond Res. 2013;28:1722-1731. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31. Knezevic OM, Mirkov DM, Kadija M, Nedeljkovic A, Jaric S. Asymmetries in explosive strength following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee. 2014;21:1039-1045. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32. Kobayashi A, Higuchi H, Terauchi M, Kobayashi F, Kimura M, Takagishi K. Muscle performance after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Int Orthop. 2004;28:48-51. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33. Konishi Y, Fukubayashi T. Relationship between muscle volume and muscle torque of the hamstrings after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. J Sci Med Sport. 2010;13:101-105. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34. Konishi YU. ACL repair might induce further abnormality of gamma loop in the intact side of the quadriceps femoris. Int J Sports Med. 2011;32:292-296. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35. Krych A, Arutyunyan G, Kuzma S, Levy B, Dahm D, Stuart M. Adverse effect of femoral nerve blockade on quadriceps strength and function after ACL reconstruction. J Knee Surg. 2015;28:83-88. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36. LaStayo PC, Woolf JM, Lewek MD, Snyder-Mackler L, Reich T, Lindstedt SL. Eccentric muscle contractions: their contribution to injury, prevention, rehabilitation, and sport. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2003;33:557-571. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37. Lee S, Seong SC, Jo H, Park YK, Lee MC. Outcome of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using quadriceps tendon autograft. Arthroscopy. 2004;20:795-802. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38. Lephart SM, Kocher MS, Harner CD, Fu FH. Quadriceps strength and functional capacity after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Patellar tendon autograft versus allograft. Am J Sports Med. 1993;21:738-743. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39. Lepley LK, Palmieri-Smith RM. Effect of eccentric strengthening after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction on quadriceps strength. J Sport Rehabil. 2013;22:150-156. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40. Lepley LK, Palmieri-Smith RM. Pre-operative quadriceps activation is related to post-operative activation, not strength, in patients post-ACL reconstruction [published online October 15, 2014]. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 10.1007/s00167-014-3371-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41. Lepley LK, Wojtys EM, Palmieri-Smith RM. Combination of eccentric exercise and neuromuscular electrical stimulation to improve quadriceps function post-ACL reconstruction [published online December 10, 2014]. Knee. 10.1016/j.knee.2014.11.013. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42. Lewek M, Rudolph K, Axe M, Snyder-Mackler L. The effect of insufficient quadriceps strength on gait after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2002;17:56-63. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43. Mather RC, 3rd, Koenig L, Kocher MS, et al. Societal and economic impact of anterior cruciate ligament tears. J Bone Joint Surg. 2013;95:1751-1759. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44. McHugh MP, Tyler TF, Browne MG, Gleim GW, Nicholas SJ. Electromyographic predictors of residual quadriceps muscle weakness after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med. 2002;30:334-339. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45. McHugh MP, Tyler TF, Gleim GW, Nicholas SJ. Preoperative indicators of motion loss and weakness following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1998;27:407-411. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46. Nicholas SJ, Tyler TF, McHugh MP, Gleim GW. The effect on leg strength of tourniquet use during anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective randomized study. Arthroscopy. 2001;17:603-607. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47. Østeras H, Augestad LB, Tondel S. Isokinetic muscle strength after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 1998;8(5 pt 1):279-282. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48. Palmieri-Smith RM, Lepley LK. Quadriceps strength asymmetry following ACL reconstruction alters knee joint biomechanics and functional performance at time of return to activity. Am J Sports Med. In press. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
- 49. Palmieri-Smith RM, Thomas AC, Wojtys EM. Maximizing quadriceps strength after ACL reconstruction. Clin Sports Med. 2008;27:405-424. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50. Reid A, Birmingham TB, Stratford PW, Alcock GK, Giffin JR. Hop testing provides a reliable and valid outcome measure during rehabilitation after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Phys Ther. 2007;87:337-349. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51. Risberg MA, Holm I, Steen H, Beynnon BD. Sensitivity to changes over time for the IKDC form, the Lysholm score, and the Cincinnati knee score. A prospective study of 120 ACL reconstructed patients with a 2-year follow-up. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 1999;7:152-159. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 52. Schmitt LC, Paterno MV, Hewett TE. The impact of quadriceps femoris strength asymmetry on functional performance at return to sport following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2012;42:750-759. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53. Segawa H, Omori G, Koga Y, Kameo T, Iida S, Tanaka M. Rotational muscle strength of the limb after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using semitendinosus and gracilis tendon. Arthroscopy. 2002;18:177-182. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54. Shelbourne KD, Foulk DA. Timing of surgery in acute anterior cruciate ligament tears on the return of quadriceps muscle strength after reconstruction using an autogenous patellar tendon graft. Am J Sports Med. 1995;23:686-689. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55. Shelbourne KD, Johnson BC. Effects of patellar tendon width and preoperative quadriceps strength on strength return after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with ipsilateral bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft. Am J Sports Med. 2004;32:1474-1478. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56. Soon J, Chang P, Neo CPC, Mitra AK, Tay BK. Morbidity following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using hamstring autograft. Ann Acad Med Singapore. 2004;33:214-219. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57. Thomas AC, Villwock M, Wojtys EM, Palmieri-Smith RM. Lower extremity muscle strength after anterior cruciate ligament injury and reconstruction. J Athl Train. 2013;48:610-620. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58. Tourville TW, Jarrell KM, Naud S, Slauterbeck JR, Johnson RJ, Beynnon BD. Relationship between isokinetic strength and tibiofemoral joint space width changes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med. 2014;42:302-311. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59. Witvrouw E, Bellemans J, Verdonk R, Cambier D, Coorevits P, Almqvist F. Patellar tendon vs. doubled semitendinosus and gracilis tendon for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Int Orthop. 2001;25:308-311. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60. Wojtys EM, Huston LJ. Longitudinal effects of anterior cruciate ligament injury and patellar tendon autograft reconstruction on neuromuscular performance. Am J Sports Med. 2000;28:336-344. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 61. Yasuda K, Ohkoshi Y, Tanabe Y, Kaneda K. Quantitative evaluation of knee instability and muscle strength after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using patellar and quadriceps tendon. Am J Sports Med. 1992;20:471-475. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 62. Yosmaoglu HB, Baltaci G, Kaya D, Ozer H. Tracking ability, motor coordination, and functional determinants after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. J Sport Rehabil. 2011;20:207-218. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.