Abstract
Background It remains unclear which movement quality items are associated with second anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries after ACL reconstruction.
Hypotheses 1) Movement quality measured with the Landing Error Scoring System (LESS) is not associated with second ACL injury in soccer players who returned to sports after ACL reconstruction. 2) In an exploratory analysis, soccer players with and without second ACL injuries display differences in individual LESS items.
Methods Fourteen male recreational ACL-reconstructed soccer players had non-fatigued and fatigued movement quality measurement with LESS score three years ago and were now interviewed by phone about soccer participation and second ACL injuries.
Results Two soccer players did not return to soccer and were therefore excluded from analysis. Six of twelve (50%) included soccer players had a second ACL injury. There was no association between the non-fatigued (p=1.000) and fatigued (p=0.455) LESS score and second ACL injuries. However, when exploring individual LESS items, we found 50% of the soccer players with second ACL injury landing with little trunk and knee flexion displacement in combination with knee valgus, while none of the soccer players without second ACL injury had this combination of LESS errors. This difference was only seen in the fatigued state.
Conclusions It might be the combination of little knee and trunk flexion displacement with knee valgus during landing which predisposes an athlete to a second ACL injury, especially in a fatigued state.
Clinical relevance When screening athletes after ACL reconstruction for second ACL injury risk, combining measurement of knee valgus with knee and trunk flexion displacement in a fatigued state might be give more insight into risk than using the complete LESS score or evaluating knee valgus as a sole risk factor.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethics committee of Maxima Medisch Centrum Eindhoven deemed that our study did not fall within the remit of the Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act (N19.117).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript.