Symmetry does not Indicate Recovery: Single-leg Hop Before and After a Lower Extremity Injury

Lower extremity return to sport testing: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Lower extremity injuries account for an enormous portion of sports medicine cases in the United States each year. Unfortunately, there are no uniform criteria for athletes to complete prior to returning to sport (RTS) following a lower extremity injury. Therefore, the purpose of this systematic review is to review current literature for joint-specific and global lower extremity testing to determine the most valid functional test that can be utilized to reduce the risk of re-injury as athletes RTS.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, PubMed Central, Cochrane Library, OVID, and Embase databases was conducted for studies prior to May 2024 following PRISMA guidelines. ROBINS-I Tool was utilized for the risk of bias assessment.

RESULTS

Of 19,189 studies, 114 (0.6%) studies published prior to May of 2024 met inclusion criteria and were analyzed. Eighty five percent of articles discussed RTS for individuals with knee pathology. Furthermore, 82% specifically analyzed RTS following ACL reconstruction. The most common RTS test was isokinetic dynamometry testing which is seen in 73% of studies. Only 6.2% of studies analyzed RTS for individuals with hip pathology and only two studies analyzed RTS for patients with ankle injuries.

CONCLUSION

Even with the enormous amount of literature that exists regarding ACL injuries and testing there is no standardized criterion for RTS clearance. The suggested test batteries from this review can serve as a framework for future research and validation for joint-specific RTS functional testing.

Restorative Physical Function and Patient-Reported Outcomes After Acute Lateral Ankle Sprain in High School Athletes

CONTEXT

Limited longitudinal data exist on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after acute lateral ankle sprain (LAS). The impact of prospective hop testing on PROs at return to play (RTP) and 6 months post-RTP is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To determine if high school athletes with an LAS who return to baseline physical function as measured by a single-leg hop for distance (SLHOP) have better PROs relative to individuals who return to symmetry.

DESIGN

Cohort study.

SETTING

Ten high schools over 2 years.

PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS

Two hundred six high school athletes who sustained an LAS were included. Baseline SLHOP testing was completed preinjury. Patient-reported outcomes were recorded at time of injury, RTP, and 6 months post-RTP. Participants were classified as symmetry (n = 134) or restorative (n = 72). Symmetry was defined as achieving an SLHOP performance within 10% of the uninjured limb at RTP. Restorative was defined as achieving an SLHOP performance within 10% of preinjury levels.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

The Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM)-Activities of Daily Living, FAAM-Sport, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Anxiety, and PROMIS Depression were analyzed using a 2-way nonparametric analysis of variance. The interaction term of group by time was the main comparison of interest and was interpreted if significant. Post hoc multiple comparisons were performed using the Tukey-Kramer test.

RESULTS

The restorative group reported better FAAM scores at RTP and 6 months post-RTP (P < .05) relative to the symmetry group. There were no differences in PROMIS Anxiety scores at time of injury, RTP, or 6 months post-RTP between groups (P > .05). There were no differences in PROMIS Depression scores at time of injury between groups (P = .34), but the restorative group had worse PROMIS Depression scores at RTP (P = .03).

CONCLUSIONS

The restorative group reported better FAAM-ADL and FAAM-Sport scores at RTP and 6 months post-RTP relative to the symmetry group. Restoring individuals to baseline physical function rather than limb symmetry may ensure better PROs after an LAS.

Are Functional Performance Test Scores Better When Compared to Baseline or Contralateral Limb Scores Following LE Injury in Adolescent Athletes?

Background

Functional performance tests (FPT) have been used with athletes following an injury to determine readiness to return-to-play (RTP), usually using limb symmetry indices to the contralateral limb or a baseline score. There is not a consensus as to which criterion scores are best compared.

Hypothesis/Purpose

This study aimed to compare common functional performance test scores from injured athletes at the time of release to RTP to both preseason baseline scores and to the contralateral limb. It was hypothesized that using baseline scores for comparison would be more responsive to residual deficits following injury than using the contralateral limb.

Study Design

Prospective longitudinal cohort study.

Methods

High school athletes (n=395) from all varsity sports completed a battery of FPTs including the Y-Balance Test (YBT), single limb hop tests and T-Test for agility (TT) during their preseason to establish baseline data. Injured athletes (n=19) were re-tested using all FTP's again at the time of RTP. Paired t-tests were used to detect if significant (p\<0.05) residual deficits were present at time of RTP when compared to baseline and to contralateral scores on FPTs.

Results

Differences in YBT scores were found in the anterior direction only (p=0.021) when comparing RTP to preseason, but there were no differences when compared to RTP data for the contralateral limb. Differences were detected with the single leg hop test (p = 0.001) when comparing the RTP to preseason and were also detected in both the single leg hop (p= 0.001) and triple hop (p=0.018) when compared to the contralateral limb. Differences in TT scores were detected when comparing RTP to preseason for cutting first with both the unaffected (p = 0.019) and affected (p = 0.014) limbs.

Conclusions

The YBT in the anterior direction and the TT are better able to detect residual deficits when comparing RTP to preseason scores. Hop tests are better able to detect deficits when compared to the contralateral limb. These results could make preseason testing more efficient when creating a reference for determining RTP readiness following lower extremity injury.

Evaluating a Wearable Solution for Measuring Lower Extremity Asymmetry During Landing

Purpose

Force plates can be used to monitor landing asymmetries during rehabilitation, but they are not widely available. Accelerometer-based wearable technology may be a more feasible solution. The purpose of this article was to determine the agreement between impact accelerations measured with force plates and accelerometer-derived measures of (1) centre of mass (COM) acceleration and (2) tibial acceleration asymmetries during bilateral landings.

Method

Participants completed three countermovement jumps (CMJ) and three squat jumps (SJ) on dual force plates with triaxial accelerometers attached to each tibia and lower back, near the COM. Bland and Altman 95% limits of agreement (95% LOA) were calculated.

Results

19 adults (n = 11; 58% women, n = 8; 42% men) participated in the study. The mean differences between impact and COM accelerations were 0.24 g (95% LOA: -1.34 g to 1.82 g) and 0.38 g (95% LOA: -1.15 to 1.91 g) for the CMJ and SJ, respectively. The mean differences between the impact and tibial acceleration-based lower limb asymmetries in the CMJ and SJ were -6% (95% LOA: -32% to 19%) and 0% (95% LOA: -45% to 45%), respectively.

Conclusions

Our findings show acceptable agreement between impact acceleration and accelerometer-based COM acceleration and lack of agreement between impact accelerations and accelerometer-based tibial acceleration asymmetries. COM acceleration could be used to quantify landing impacts during rehabilitation, but we do not consider the accelerometer-based asymmetry measures to be a suitable alternative for force plate-based measures. Future work should focus on determining normative values for lower extremity asymmetries during landing tasks.

Evaluation of the Back-in-Action test Battery In Uninjured High School American Football Players

Background

Return to sport testing is an established routine, especially for athletes who have ruptured their anterior cruciate ligament (ACL). Various tests are performed, often combined in test batteries, such as the Back-in-action (BIA) test battery. Unfortunately, pre-injury performance is often unknown, and only few athletes pass the high demands of these test batteries.

Purpose

The aim of the study was to determine the performance of under 18 American football players on the BIA to establish pre-injury sport specific benchmarks for future RTS testing and to compare these values to data from an age-matched reference group.

Methods

Fifty-three healthy male American football players underwent a functional assessment using the "Back-in-action" test battery evaluating agility, speed (Parkour-Jumps and Quick-Feet test), balance (using a PC based balance board), and power (Counter-Movement-Jump [CMJ]) as objective measures. Their results were compared with a previously tested reference group (RP) and within the american football players (AF) through three subgroups according to field playing position.

Results

Overall, the American football (AF) athletes showed lower balance scores for both legs (AF: 3.71/3.57/3.61; RP: 3.4/3.2/3.2; p<0.002) compared to the reference population (RP). CMJ height and Quick-Feet results were not statistically different (p>0.05), Parkour-Jump times (AF: 8.18/ 8.13 sec.; RP: 5.9/5.9sec.; p<0.001) were significantly slower. Power output in all CMJ's (AF: 46.86/36.94/37.36 W/kg; RP: 43.2/29.5/29 W/kg; p<0.001) was significantly higher than the RP. Passing and running game involved players (G2 & G3) showed significantly better balance scores (G2+G3: 3.36/3.27/3.33; G1: 4.22/4.06/4.10; p<0.001), higher jump height (G2&G3: 38.87/24.02/24.96 cm; G1: 32.03/19.50/18.96 cm; p<0.001) and more watts/kg (G2&G3: 48.83/37.21/37.64 W/kg; G1: 43.95/36.88/36.53 W/kg; p<0.001) compared to blocking players like Linemen (G1) and to the age matched reference population (RP).

Conclusion

Only 53% of the healthy athletes would have been cleared for sport using the BIA test criteria, which highlights the challenging passing criteria. Despite significantly greater power measurements, scores of balance and agility were poorer compared to the reference group, especially for linemen. These data may serve as sport and position specific reference for high school American football players, instead of using the non-specific reference group data.

Study design

cross-sectional study.

Level of evidence

IIb.

Development and reliability of a visual-cognitive medial side hop for return to sport testing

OBJECTIVES

To develop and evaluate the reliability of a new visual-cognitive medial side hop (VCMH) test that challenges physical and cognitive performance to potentially improve return to sport testing.

DESIGN

Test-retest experimental design.

SETTING

Laboratory.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty-two healthy college students participated (11 females; 23.5 ± 3.64 years; 172.9 ± 11.58 cm; 74.1 ± 17.25 kg; Tegner Score 5.6 ± 1.1).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Subjects performed a medial side hop for distance with and without a visual-cognitive task (VCMH). Maximum hop distance and cognitive errors were measured.

RESULTS

There was strong reliability for the traditional medial side hop (ICC3,1 = 0.88[0.72, 0.95]; SEM = 7.16 cm) and VCMH distances (ICC3,1 = 0.86[0.66, 0.94]; SEM = 6.82 cm). Maximum hop distance was significantly lower during the VCMH (86.9 ± 18.2 cm) compared to the traditional medial side hop (96.3 ± 20.7 cm; p < 0.05; d = 0.74), with a performance deficit of 9.69%.

CONCLUSION

The VCMH has high test-retest reliability and resulted in a significant dual-task cost with a reduction in physical performance when compared to the traditional medial side hop.