Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2019 Jun;49(6):917-929.
doi: 10.1007/s40279-019-01093-x.

What is the Evidence for and Validity of Return-to-Sport Testing after Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Surgery? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

What is the Evidence for and Validity of Return-to-Sport Testing after Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Surgery? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Kate E Webster et al. Sports Med. 2019 Jun.

Abstract

Background: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) return-to-sport (RTS) test batteries are popular and are employed to test athletes' sport performance and help ensure a safe return to sport.

Objective: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine: (1) the proportion of patients who passed RTS test batteries after ACL reconstruction, (2) whether passing RTS test batteries increased rates of return to play, and (3) whether passing RTS test batteries reduced subsequent rates of knee and ACL injury.

Methods: Five databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and SPORTDiscus) were searched to identify relevant studies and data were extracted regarding the number of patients who passed the RTS test battery, as well as subsequent RTS rates and re-injury data when available. Results were combined using proportional and risk-ratio meta-analyses.

Results: Eighteen studies met eligibility criteria. Proportional meta-analysis showed that only 23% of patients passed RTS test batteries. One study showed that passing an RTS test battery led to greater RTS rates. Two studies showed passing RTS test batteries did not significantly reduce the risk of a further knee injury (risk ratio (RR) = 0.28 (95% CI 0.04-0.94), p = 0.09) and five studies showed that passing RTS test batteries did not reduce the risk for all subsequent ACL injuries (RR = 0.80 (95% CI 0.27-2.3), p = 0.7). However, passing an RTS test battery did significantly reduce the risk for subsequent graft rupture (RR = 0.40 (95% CI 0.23-0.69), p < 0.001], although it increased the risk for a subsequent contralateral ACL injury (RR = 3.35 (95% CI 1.52-7.37), p = 0.003].

Conclusion: These analyses shows that there are equivocal findings in terms of the validity of current RTS test batteries in relation to reduction of the risk of graft rupture and contralateral ACL injuries. These findings have implications for RTS advice given to patients based on the results of RTS test batteries, and further work is needed to validate the criteria currently used and determine the true value.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Clin J Sport Med. 2007 Jul;17(4):258-62 - PubMed
    1. Ann Intern Med. 2009 Aug 18;151(4):264-9, W64 - PubMed
    1. Br J Sports Med. 2011 Jun;45(7):596-606 - PubMed
    1. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2012 Jun;20(6):1143-51 - PubMed
    1. Clin J Sport Med. 2012 Mar;22(2):116-21 - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources