Joint Work Distribution During Single Leg Hop Landing After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Prior work indicates that distance alone is not an adequate measure of movement quality in return to sport testing following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR); however, landing strategies and resulting differences in joint work contributions during single leg hop landings have been limited to homogenous ACLR cohorts. PURPOSE: This study assessed lower extremity joint work contributions during landing from a single leg hop for distance in ACLR patients > 6 months post-op. We hypothesized that the involved leg would show a shift in negative joint work from the knee to the hip as compared to the uninvolved limb, despite no measurable differences in hop distance. METHODS: 24 patients (M/F: 14/10; Age: 26 ± 9.2 y; Time Since Surgery: 41.2 ± 13.3 weeks), who underwent ACLR > 6 months prior to testing, were included in the analysis. Hop testing was conducted using a 10-camera motion capture system with two integrated force plates. Negative joint work was taken as the integral of the negative joint power curve from initial plate contact to three seconds after landing. Individual joint work was expressed as a percentage of total lower body work in this window. Paired t-tests were used to compare interlimb differences in joint work and hop distance with a Bonferroni-adjusted significance level of α = .01. RESULTS: Knee negative joint work contribution (MD±SE [CI95]: -9.54 ± 9.92 [-13.73, -5.35] %, p < .001, Cohen’s d: -0.961), total negative joint work (MD±SE [CI95]: -0.38 ± 0.64 [-0.65, 0.11] J/kg, p < .01, Cohen’s d: -0.599), and hop distance (MD±SE [CI95]: -0.14 ± 0.14 [-0.20, -0.08] m, p < .001, Cohen’s d: -0.979) were lower in involved compared to uninvolved limbs. Hip negative joint work contribution was larger in involved compared to uninvolved limbs (MD±SE [CI95]: 6.21 ± 9.75 [2.09, 10.33] %, p < .01, Cohen’s d: 0.637) while no differences in ankle joint work (p=.07) were detected. CONCLUSION: Single leg hop symmetry between limbs approached the necessary clinical criteria despite statistically significant differences in hop distances, rejecting the hypothesis that shifts in joint work occur without differences in hop distance. Alterations in lower extremity joint work were observed between the involved and uninvolved limbs of the heterogenous ACLR cohort > 6 months post-op indicative of altered landing strategies.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
Published
2024-09-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1249/01.mss.0001056496.50140.cb
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Knee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.57
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Joint Work Distribution During Single Leg Hop Landing After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Michael Letter, Thomas Michael Best, Lee D. Kaplan, Moataz Eltoukhy et al.
1 citations
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
Knee injuries and reconstruction techniques
0.57
article

Joint Work Distribution During Single Leg Hop Landing After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Michael Letter, Thomas Michael Best, Lee D. Kaplan, Moataz Eltoukhy, Michael G. Baraga, Joseph F. Signorile, Zachary Ripic, Brandon Schoenwether, Rachel Rumana, Nicholas Franklin
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Prior work indicates that distance alone is not an adequate measure of movement quality in return to sport testing following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR); however, landing strategies and resulting differences in joint work contributions during single leg hop landings have been limited to homogenous ACLR cohorts. PURPOSE: This study assessed lower extremity joint work contributions during landing from a single leg hop for distance in ACLR patients > 6 months post-op. We hypothesized that the involved leg would show a shift in negative joint work from the knee to the hip as compared to the uninvolved limb, despite no measurable differences in hop distance. METHODS: 24 patients (M/F: 14/10; Age: 26 ± 9.2 y; Time Since Surgery: 41.2 ± 13.3 weeks), who underwent ACLR > 6 months prior to testing, were included in the analysis. Hop testing was conducted using a 10-camera motion capture system with two integrated force plates. Negative joint work was taken as the integral of the negative joint power curve from initial plate contact to three seconds after landing. Individual joint work was expressed as a percentage of total lower body work in this window. Paired t-tests were used to compare interlimb differences in joint work and hop distance with a Bonferroni-adjusted significance level of α = .01. RESULTS: Knee negative joint work contribution (MD±SE [CI95]: -9.54 ± 9.92 [-13.73, -5.35] %, p < .001, Cohen’s d: -0.961), total negative joint work (MD±SE [CI95]: -0.38 ± 0.64 [-0.65, 0.11] J/kg, p < .01, Cohen’s d: -0.599), and hop distance (MD±SE [CI95]: -0.14 ± 0.14 [-0.20, -0.08] m, p < .001, Cohen’s d: -0.979) were lower in involved compared to uninvolved limbs. Hip negative joint work contribution was larger in involved compared to uninvolved limbs (MD±SE [CI95]: 6.21 ± 9.75 [2.09, 10.33] %, p < .01, Cohen’s d: 0.637) while no differences in ankle joint work (p=.07) were detected. CONCLUSION: Single leg hop symmetry between limbs approached the necessary clinical criteria despite statistically significant differences in hop distances, rejecting the hypothesis that shifts in joint work occur without differences in hop distance. Alterations in lower extremity joint work were observed between the involved and uninvolved limbs of the heterogenous ACLR cohort > 6 months post-op indicative of altered landing strategies.

Medicine & Science in Sports & ExerciseVol. 56(10S)
University of Miami (US), Jacobs (United States) (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 30%
Knee injuries and reconstruction techniques
0.57
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.