Volume 7, Issue 1 (Continuously Updated 2024)
Func Disabil J 2024, 7(1): 0-0 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Kazemi K, Salehi R, Sanjari M A, Torkaman A. Intralimb Coordination Pattern of the Lower Limbs in Male Athletes With Allograft and Autograft Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction During Landing. Func Disabil J 2024; 7 (1) : 294.1
URL: http://fdj.iums.ac.ir/article-1-245-en.html
URL: http://fdj.iums.ac.ir/article-1-245-en.html
1- Department of Physiotherapy, Rehabilitation Research Center, School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Iranian Center of Excellence in Physiotherapy, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
2- Department of Physiotherapy, Rehabilitation Research Center, School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Iranian Center of Excellence in Physiotherapy, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. ,salehi200@yahoo.com
3- Department of Rehabilitation Basic Sciences, Rehabilitation Research Center, School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
4- Department of Orthopedic, School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
2- Department of Physiotherapy, Rehabilitation Research Center, School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Iranian Center of Excellence in Physiotherapy, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. ,
3- Department of Rehabilitation Basic Sciences, Rehabilitation Research Center, School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
4- Department of Orthopedic, School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Abstract: (803 Views)
Background and Objectives: Two common choices exist for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, autograft and allograft. Hamstring tendon autografts and soft-tissue allografts are commonly used for ACL reconstruction. The outcomes between these two grafts are controversial. This research aims to quantify and compare lower limb joint coordination between two ACL reconstruction graft options and healthy individuals.
Methods: Sixty-one athletes were enrolled after ACL reconstruction surgery (allograft, n=22; autograft, n=18). Furthermore, twenty-one healthy athletes were considered in the control group. The inclusion criteria included unilateral anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery with allograft and autograft methods, male athletes with a minimum of 9 months and a maximum of two years since their surgery, successfully passing a series of quadriceps and hamstring strength tests and distance jumping before entering sports-specific activities under the supervision of a sports physiotherapist, and returning to pre-injury sports activities.
Results: Autograft was not statistically different from matched healthy limbs in terms of joint coordination variability and magnitude (P>0.05). However, the magnitude of joint coordination was superior to the allograft group compared to the autograft reconstructed ACL (P<0.05).
Conclusion: Although our result reported no significant difference between groups in joint coordination variability, having an insight into coordinative function after ACL reconstruction will help develop postoperative rehabilitation programs as well as minimize the re-injury risk among patients. We also suggest that scholars should conduct more robust trials with valid research designs to control the results of ACL reconstruction comparison with autograft and allograft.
Methods: Sixty-one athletes were enrolled after ACL reconstruction surgery (allograft, n=22; autograft, n=18). Furthermore, twenty-one healthy athletes were considered in the control group. The inclusion criteria included unilateral anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery with allograft and autograft methods, male athletes with a minimum of 9 months and a maximum of two years since their surgery, successfully passing a series of quadriceps and hamstring strength tests and distance jumping before entering sports-specific activities under the supervision of a sports physiotherapist, and returning to pre-injury sports activities.
Results: Autograft was not statistically different from matched healthy limbs in terms of joint coordination variability and magnitude (P>0.05). However, the magnitude of joint coordination was superior to the allograft group compared to the autograft reconstructed ACL (P<0.05).
Conclusion: Although our result reported no significant difference between groups in joint coordination variability, having an insight into coordinative function after ACL reconstruction will help develop postoperative rehabilitation programs as well as minimize the re-injury risk among patients. We also suggest that scholars should conduct more robust trials with valid research designs to control the results of ACL reconstruction comparison with autograft and allograft.
Article number: 294.1
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Physiotherapy
Received: 2024/01/21 | Accepted: 2024/01/28 | Published: 2024/03/7
Received: 2024/01/21 | Accepted: 2024/01/28 | Published: 2024/03/7
Contact Information
All the work in this journal are licensed under a Creative Commons
ATTRIBUTION-NONCOMMERCIAL-SHAREALIKE 4.0
INTERNATIONAL International License.
Tehran Province, Tehran, District 3, Mirdamad Ave, Nezam Ave, School of Rehabilitation Science
Tel: +98 21 22228051-2 Ext: 180
Fax98 21 22220946
All the work in this journal are licensed under a Creative Commons
ATTRIBUTION-NONCOMMERCIAL-SHAREALIKE 4.0
INTERNATIONAL International License.