| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Bullock, Garrett S., et al.
(författare)
-
Kinesiophobia, Knee Self-Efficacy, and Fear Avoidance Beliefs in People with ACL Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Sports Medicine. - : ADIS INT LTD. - 0112-1642 .- 1179-2035. ; 52, s. 3001-3019
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background To improve the understanding of the psychological impacts of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury, a systematic review synthesizing the evidence on knee self-efficacy, fear avoidance beliefs and kinesiophobia following ACL injury is needed. Objective The aim of this systematic review was to investigate knee self-efficacy, fear avoidance beliefs and kinesiophobia following ACL injury, and compare these outcomes following management with rehabilitation alone, early and delayed ACL reconstruction (ACLR). Methods Seven databases were searched from inception to April 14, 2022. Articles were included if they assessed Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (TSK), Knee Self-Efficacy Scale (KSES), or Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ). Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using domain-based RoB tools (ROBINS-1, RoB 2, RoBANS), and GRADE-assessed certainty of evidence. Random-effects meta-analyses pooled outcomes, stratified by time post-injury (pre-operative, 3-6 months, 7-12 months, > 1-2 years, > 2-5 years, > 5 years). Results Seventy-three studies (70% high RoB) were included (study outcomes: TSK: 55; KSES: 22; FABQ: 5). Meta-analysis demonstrated worse kinesiophobia and self-efficacy pre-operatively (pooled mean [95% CI], TSK-11: 23.8 [22.2-25.3]; KSES: 5.0 [4.4-5.5]) compared with 3-6 months following ACLR (TSK-11: 19.6 [18.7-20.6]; KSES: 19.6 [18.6-20.6]). Meta-analysis suggests similar kinesiophobia > 3-6 months following early ACLR (19.8 [4.9]) versus delayed ACLR (17.2 [5.0]). Only one study assessed outcomes comparing ACLR with rehabilitation only. Conclusions Knee self-efficacy and kinesiophobia improved from pre-ACLR to 3-6 months following ACLR, with similar outcomes after 6 months. Since the overall evidence was weak, there is a need for high-quality observational and intervention studies focusing on psychological outcomes following ACL injury.
|
|
| 5. |
- Sell, Timothy C., et al.
(författare)
-
Anterior Cruciate Ligament Return to Sport after Injury Scale (ACL-RSI) Scores over Time After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis
- 2024
-
Ingår i: SPORTS MEDICINE-OPEN. - : SPRINGER. - 2199-1170. ; 10:1
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Psychological readiness is an important consideration for athletes and clinicians when making return to sport decisions following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). To improve our understanding of the extent of deficits in psychological readiness, a systematic review is necessary.Objective To investigate psychological readiness (measured via the Anterior Cruciate Ligament-Return to Sport after Injury scale (ACL-RSI)) over time after ACL tear and understand if time between injury and surgery, age, and sex are associated with ACL-RSI scores.Methods Seven databases were searched from the earliest date available to March 22, 2022. Articles reporting ACL-RSI scores after ACL tear were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I, RoB-2, and RoBANS tools based on the study design. Evidence certainty was assessed for each analysis. Random-effects meta-analyses pooled ACL-RSI scores, stratified by time post-injury and based on treatment approach (i.e., early ACLR, delayed ACLR, and unclear approach).Results A total of 83 studies were included in this review (78% high risk of bias). Evidence certainty was 'weak' or 'limited' for all analyses. Overall, ACL-RSI scores were higher at 3 to 6 months post-ACLR (mean = 61.5 [95% confidence interval (CI) 58.6, 64.4], I2 = 94%) compared to pre-ACLR (mean = 44.4 [95% CI 38.2, 50.7], I2 = 98%), remained relatively stable, until they reached the highest point 2 to 5 years after ACLR (mean = 70.7 [95% CI 63.0, 78.5], I2 = 98%). Meta-regression suggests shorter time from injury to surgery, male sex, and older age were associated with higher ACL-RSI scores only 3 to 6 months post-ACLR (heterogeneity explained R2 = 47.6%), and this reduced 1-2 years after ACLR (heterogeneity explained R2 = 27.0%).Conclusion Psychological readiness to return to sport appears to improve early after ACL injury, with little subsequent improvement until >= 2-years after ACLR. Longer time from injury to surgery, female sex and older age might be negatively related to ACL-RSI scores 12-24 months after ACLR. Due to the weak evidence quality rating and the considerable importance of psychological readiness for long-term outcomes after ACL injury, there is an urgent need for well-designed studies that maximize internal validity and identify additional prognostic factors for psychological readiness at times critical for return to sport decisions. Registration: Open Science Framework (OSF), https://osf.io/2tezs/.Conclusion Psychological readiness to return to sport appears to improve early after ACL injury, with little subsequent improvement until >= 2-years after ACLR. Longer time from injury to surgery, female sex and older age might be negatively related to ACL-RSI scores 12-24 months after ACLR. Due to the weak evidence quality rating and the considerable importance of psychological readiness for long-term outcomes after ACL injury, there is an urgent need for well-designed studies that maximize internal validity and identify additional prognostic factors for psychological readiness at times critical for return to sport decisions. Registration: Open Science Framework (OSF), https://osf.io/2tezs/. Over 70% of studies measuring ACL-RSI scores were judged to have high risk of bias (i.e., low internal validity), leading to a certainty of evidence rating of weak for all analyses. ACL-RSI scores do not appear to increase during typical rehabilitation periods after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Age, sex, and time from injury to surgery (i.e., treatment approach) appear prognostic for early ACL-RSI scores, but their prognostic ability diminishes for later ACL-RSI scores.
|
|
| 6. |
- Whittaker, Jackie L., et al.
(författare)
-
OPTIKNEE 2022 : Consensus recommendations to optimise knee health after traumatic knee injury to prevent osteoarthritis
- 2022
-
Ingår i: British journal of sports medicine. - : BMJ. - 0306-3674 .- 1473-0480. ; 56:24, s. 1393-1405
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The goal of the OPTIKNEE consensus is to improve knee and overall health, to prevent osteoarthritis (OA) after a traumatic knee injury. The consensus followed a seven-step hybrid process. Expert groups conducted 7 systematic reviews to synthesise the current evidence and inform recommendations on the burden of knee injuries; risk factors for post-traumatic knee OA; rehabilitation to prevent post-traumatic knee OA; and patient-reported outcomes, muscle function and functional performance tests to monitor people at risk of post-traumatic knee OA. Draft consensus definitions, and clinical and research recommendations were generated, iteratively refined, and discussed at 6, tri-weekly, 2-hour videoconferencing meetings. After each meeting, items were finalised before the expert group (n=36) rated the level of appropriateness for each using a 9-point Likert scale, and recorded dissenting viewpoints through an anonymous online survey. Seven definitions, and 8 clinical recommendations (who to target, what to target and when, rehabilitation approach and interventions, what outcomes to monitor and how) and 6 research recommendations (research priorities, study design considerations, what outcomes to monitor and how) were voted on. All definitions and recommendations were rated appropriate (median appropriateness scores of 7-9) except for two subcomponents of one clinical recommendation, which were rated uncertain (median appropriateness score of 4.5-5.5). Varying levels of evidence supported each recommendation. Clinicians, patients, researchers and other stakeholders may use the definitions and recommendations to advocate for, guide, develop, test and implement person-centred evidence-based rehabilitation programmes following traumatic knee injury, and facilitate data synthesis to reduce the burden of knee post-traumatic knee OA.
|
|
