Download PDF
Int J Sports Med 2000; 21(7): 529-535
DOI: 10.1055/s-2000-7414
Orthopedics and Clinical Science
Georg Thieme Verlag Stuttgart · New York

Correlates of Knee Laxity Change in Early Rehabilitationafter Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

M.  C.  Morrissey, Z.  L.  Hudson, W.  I.  Drechsler, F.  J.  Coutts, J.  B.  King, T.  B.  McAuliffe
  • Department of Health Sciences, University of East London, UK Department of Orthopaedics, Royal London Hospitals, London, UK Departments of Orthopaedics, Whipps Cross Hospital, London, UK
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
31 December 2000 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Factors other than ligament graft length (knee ROM, knee swelling, initial knee laxity) may need to be accounted for in interpreting changes in knee laxity during rehabilitation following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) surgery. Twenty-three patients recovering from ACLR surgery (16 M, 7 F, age mean = 30) were tested at 2 and 6 weeks after ACLR with knee laxity measured using th Knee Signature System arthrometer, passive ROM with a standard goniometer and swelling by measuring knee circumference at the mid-patella level using a cloth measuring tape. Spearman correlation coefficients (in parentheses) were calculated using rankings of the change in the injured minus uninjured knee laxity as the dependent variable and the following independent variables: pre-test injured minus uninjured knee laxity (ranked; - 0.457; statistically significant two-tailed P < 0.05); change in injured knee maximum extension relative to the uninjured side (ranked; 0.127); change in injured knee maximum flexion relative to the uninjured side (unranked; - 0.073); and change in the injured minus uninjured knee girth (unranked; - 0.159). These results indicate that consideration should be given to the patient's knee laxity at the start of intervention when using changes in laxity to guide rehabilitation after ACLR.

Key words:

Arthrometer, passive range of motion, knee swelling.

References

  • 01 Bach B R, Levy M E, Bojchuk J, Tradonsky S, BushJoseph C A, Khan N H. Single-incision endoscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using patellar tendon autograft - minimum two-year follow-up evaluation.  Am J Sports Med. 1998;  26 30-40
    Google Scholar
  • 02 Ballantyne B T, French A K, Heimsoth S L, Kachingwe A L, Lee J B, Soderberg G L. Influence of examiner experience and gender on interrater reliability of KT-1000 arthrometer measurements.  Phy Ther. 1995;  75 898-906
    Google Scholar
  • 03 BarberWestin S D, Noyes F R. The effect of rehabilitation and return to activity on anterior-posterior knee displacements after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.  Am J Sports Med. 1993;  21 264-270
    Google Scholar
  • 04 Blackburn T A, Voight M C, Corbacio E. Reliability of instrumented examination of knee laxity. Washington; World Congress Phy Ther Conference proceedings 1995
    Google Scholar
  • 05 Bynum E B, Barrack R L, Alexander A H. Open versus closed chain kinetic exercises after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction - a prospective randomized study.  Am J Sports Med. 1995;  23 401-406
    Google Scholar
  • 06 Fiebert I, Gresley J, Hoffman S, Kunkel K. Comparative measurements of anterior tibial translation using the KT-1000 knee arthrometer with the leg in neutral, internal-rotation, and external rotation.  J Ortho Sports Phy Ther. 1994;  19 331-334
    Google Scholar
  • 07 Fleming B C, Johnson R J, Shapiro E, Fenwick J, Howe J G, Pope M H. Clinical versus instrumented knee testing on autopsy specimens.  Clinical Ortho Related Res. 1992;  282 196-207
    Google Scholar
  • 08 Forster I W, Warrensmith C D, Tew M. Is the kt 1000 knee ligament arthrometer reliable.  J Bone Joint Surg-Brit Vol. 1989;  71 843-847
    Google Scholar
  • 09 Glasgow S G, Gabriel J P, Sapega A A. The effect of early versus late return to vigorous activities on the outcome of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.  Am J Sports Med. 1993;  21 243-248
    Google Scholar
  • 10 Hanten W P, Pace M B. Reliability of measuring anterior laxity of the knee-joint using a knee ligament arthrometer.  Phy Ther. 1987;  67 357-359
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Harter R A, Osternig L R, Singer K M. Instrumented Lachman tests for the evaluation of anterior laxity after reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament.  J Bone Joint Surg-Am Vol. 1989;  71 A 975-983
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Holcomb K R, Skaggs C A, Worrell T W, DeCarlo M, Shelbourne K D. Assessment of knee laxity following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.  J Sports Rehab. 1993;  2 97-103
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Kennedy J C, Roth J H, Mendenhall H V. Intraarticular replacement in the anterior cruciate deficient knee.  Am J Sports Med. 1980;  8 1-8
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Mangine R E, Noyes F R, Demaio M. Minimal protection program - advanced weight bearing and range of motion after ACL reconstruction - week-1 to week-5.  Orthopedics. 1992;  15 504-515
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Morrissey M C, Hudson Z L, Drechsler W I, Coutts F J, King J B. Correlates of knee laxity in the early period after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.  Am J Sports Med. 2000;  in review
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Morrissey M C, Hudson Z L, Drechsler W I, Coutts F J, Knight P R, King J B. Effects of open versus closed kinetic chain training on knee laxity in the early period after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.  Knee Surg Sports Trauma Arthr. 2000;  in review
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Myrer J W, Schulthies S S, Fellingham G W. Relative and absolute reliability of the KT-2000 arthrometer for uninjured knees - testing at 67, 89, 134, and 178 N and manual maximum forces.  Knee Surg Sports Trauma Arthr. 2000;  24 104-108
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Paschal S O, Stone K R, Steadman J R. Changes in knee stability after bone-patellar tendon-bone graft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and iliotibial band tenodesis.  Am J Knee Surg. 1991;  4 173-185
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Queale W S, Snyder Mackler L, Handling K A, Richards J G. Instrumented examination of knee laxity in patients with anterior cruciate deficiency - a comparison of the KT-2000, Knee Signature system, and Genucom.  J Ortho Sports Phy Ther. 1994;  19 345-351
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Riederman R, Wroble R R, Grood E S, Vanginkel L, Shaffer B L. Reproducibility of the knee signature system.  Am J Sports Med. 1991;  19 660-664
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Robnett N J, Riddle D L, Kues J M. Intertester reliability of measurements obtained with the KT-1000 on patients with reconstructed anterior cruciate ligaments.  J Ortho Sports Phy Ther. 1995;  21 113-119
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Rosen M A, Jackson D W, Atwell E A. The efficacy of continuous passive motion in the rehabilitation of anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions.  Am J Sports Med. 1992;  20 122-127
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Rubinstein R A, Shelbourne K D, Van Meter C D, McCarroll J R, Rettig A C, Gloyeske R L. Effect on knee stability if full hyperextension is restored immediately after autogenous bone-patellar tendon-bone anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.  Am J Sports Med. 1995;  23 365-368
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Shelbourne K D, Klootwyk T E, Wilckens J H, DeCarlo M S. Ligament stability 2 to 6 years after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with autogenous patellar tendon graft and participation in accelerated rehabilitation program.  Am J Sports Med. 1995;  23 575-579
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Shelbourne K D, Nitz P. Accelerated rehabilitation after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.  Am J Sports Med. 1990;  18 292-299
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Wachtl S W, Imhoff A. Retrospective comparison of 4 intraarticular anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions using 3 evaluation systems.  Arch Ortho Trauma Surg. 1994;  114 25-31
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Wright R W, Luhmann S J. The effect of knee effusions on KT-1000 arthrometry.  Am J Sports Med. 1998;  26 571-575
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Wroble R R, Vanginkel L A, Grood E S, Noyes F R, Shaffer B L. Repeatability of the KT-1000 arthrometer in a normal population.  Am J Sports Med. 1990;  18 396-399
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

M. C. Morrissey,SCD, PT 

Department of Health Sciences University of East London

Romford Road London, E15 4LZ UK

Phone: Phone:+ 44 (181) 2234597

Fax: Fax:+ 44 (181) 8493625

Email: E-mail:m.c.morrissey@uel.ac.uk

      >