A Randomized Controlled Trial of Eccentric Versus Concentric Cycling for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Rehabilitation
Background: Persistent strength and biomechanical deviations remain after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Eccentric training may reduce these and associated reinjury or osteoarthritis risks. Hypothesis: For male patients who have undergone ACLR, eccentric training is more effective...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The American journal of sports medicine 2021-03, Vol.49 (3), p.626-636 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 636 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 626 |
container_title | The American journal of sports medicine |
container_volume | 49 |
creator | Milandri, Giovanni Sivarasu, Sudesh |
description | Background:
Persistent strength and biomechanical deviations remain after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Eccentric training may reduce these and associated reinjury or osteoarthritis risks.
Hypothesis:
For male patients who have undergone ACLR, eccentric training is more effective than concentric training at improving knee flexion angle and other biomechanical deviations, as well as strength and patient-reported outcomes, using a matched perceived exertion dose.
Study Design:
Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.
Methods:
A total of 26 men, 10-16 weeks after hamstring tendon graft ACLR, were randomized to an eccentric training group or a concentric control group. Both groups trained 3 times a week for 8 weeks using the same isokinetic cycle ergometer in a matched studio environment. Exercise dose was matched in training frequency, time, progression, and intensity using a target rating of perceived exertion. Baseline and follow-up testing included questionnaires, dynamometer strength testing, and walk/run gait analysis.
Results:
Eccentric training increased knee (+2.1°; P = .022) and hip (+2.1°; P = .010) flexion angles more than concentric training but not more than the minimal clinically important difference of 3°. Very large asymmetries in baseline knee abduction moment (walk, −0.10 N·m/kg/m; run, −0.54 N·m/kg/m) had not changed in either group by follow-up. Knee valgus angle effects were mixed. Tibial rotation angle increased in both groups, but concentric training was more effective at promoting symmetry (P < .001). Both groups had similar increases in affected limb quadriceps strength and knee flexion moments during walk/run gait (by 20% to 33%). Hamstring strength increased in the eccentric group (+15.4%) but not the concentric group. Eccentric group limb forces were 33% to 70% higher than those of the concentric group, with a lower heart rate. Both groups had low pain scores throughout.
Conclusion:
For rehabilitation after ACLR, progressive eccentric cycle training was not more clinically effective than concentric training at a matched perceived intensity dose in male patients. This can guide exercise prescription for reducing gait and strength deviations of these patients.
Registration:
PACTR201602001449365 (Pan African Clinical Trials Registry), NHREC 4344 (South African). |
doi_str_mv | 10.1177/0363546520987566 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2487747941</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_0363546520987566</sage_id><sourcerecordid>2487747941</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c365t-c2b42beb22b34d8ceac6799637653bd6b0e5d93e3165f2009207487f2df480b43</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kc1L5TAUxYOMjE-dvashMJvZVNN8NstHcUbhgSDqtiTp7TPSNk7SLpyd_7kpzw8QXOXec3_3JOEgdFKS07JU6owwyQSXghJdKSHlHlqVQtCCMSm-odUyLpb5ATpM6YEQUipZfUcHjAkhNGcr9LzG12Zsw-D_Q4vrME4x9H0ub6I3PQ4dPncOsuodvoOY5rRAb0r95Ho_bnEXIl6PE0SfizrOzpsJ8MZvzZBJfA0ujGnK-uTDmNt7Y33vJ7O0x2i_M32CH6_nEbr9c35TXxSbq7-X9XpTuPyZqXDUcmrBUmoZbysHxkmltWRKCmZbaQmIVjNgpRQdJURTonilOtp2vCKWsyP0e-f7GMO_GdLUDD456HszQphTQzOtuNK8zOivT-hDmOOYX5cpzTQnQiyGZEe5GFKK0DWP0Q8mPjUlaZZ4ms_x5JWfr8azHaB9X3jLIwPFDkhmCx-3fmn4AlkHmBc</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2493940554</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A Randomized Controlled Trial of Eccentric Versus Concentric Cycling for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Rehabilitation</title><source>Access via SAGE</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Milandri, Giovanni ; Sivarasu, Sudesh</creator><creatorcontrib>Milandri, Giovanni ; Sivarasu, Sudesh</creatorcontrib><description>Background:
Persistent strength and biomechanical deviations remain after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Eccentric training may reduce these and associated reinjury or osteoarthritis risks.
Hypothesis:
For male patients who have undergone ACLR, eccentric training is more effective than concentric training at improving knee flexion angle and other biomechanical deviations, as well as strength and patient-reported outcomes, using a matched perceived exertion dose.
Study Design:
Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.
Methods:
A total of 26 men, 10-16 weeks after hamstring tendon graft ACLR, were randomized to an eccentric training group or a concentric control group. Both groups trained 3 times a week for 8 weeks using the same isokinetic cycle ergometer in a matched studio environment. Exercise dose was matched in training frequency, time, progression, and intensity using a target rating of perceived exertion. Baseline and follow-up testing included questionnaires, dynamometer strength testing, and walk/run gait analysis.
Results:
Eccentric training increased knee (+2.1°; P = .022) and hip (+2.1°; P = .010) flexion angles more than concentric training but not more than the minimal clinically important difference of 3°. Very large asymmetries in baseline knee abduction moment (walk, −0.10 N·m/kg/m; run, −0.54 N·m/kg/m) had not changed in either group by follow-up. Knee valgus angle effects were mixed. Tibial rotation angle increased in both groups, but concentric training was more effective at promoting symmetry (P < .001). Both groups had similar increases in affected limb quadriceps strength and knee flexion moments during walk/run gait (by 20% to 33%). Hamstring strength increased in the eccentric group (+15.4%) but not the concentric group. Eccentric group limb forces were 33% to 70% higher than those of the concentric group, with a lower heart rate. Both groups had low pain scores throughout.
Conclusion:
For rehabilitation after ACLR, progressive eccentric cycle training was not more clinically effective than concentric training at a matched perceived intensity dose in male patients. This can guide exercise prescription for reducing gait and strength deviations of these patients.
Registration:
PACTR201602001449365 (Pan African Clinical Trials Registry), NHREC 4344 (South African).</description><identifier>ISSN: 0363-5465</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1552-3365</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/0363546520987566</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33555943</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries - surgery ; Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction ; Bicycling ; Biomechanical Phenomena ; Biomechanics ; Clinical trials ; Gait ; Humans ; Knee ; Knee Joint - surgery ; Ligaments ; Male ; Muscle Strength ; Quadriceps Muscle ; Sports medicine</subject><ispartof>The American journal of sports medicine, 2021-03, Vol.49 (3), p.626-636</ispartof><rights>2021 The Author(s)</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c365t-c2b42beb22b34d8ceac6799637653bd6b0e5d93e3165f2009207487f2df480b43</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c365t-c2b42beb22b34d8ceac6799637653bd6b0e5d93e3165f2009207487f2df480b43</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0363546520987566$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0363546520987566$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,21819,27924,27925,43621,43622</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33555943$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Milandri, Giovanni</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sivarasu, Sudesh</creatorcontrib><title>A Randomized Controlled Trial of Eccentric Versus Concentric Cycling for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Rehabilitation</title><title>The American journal of sports medicine</title><addtitle>Am J Sports Med</addtitle><description>Background:
Persistent strength and biomechanical deviations remain after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Eccentric training may reduce these and associated reinjury or osteoarthritis risks.
Hypothesis:
For male patients who have undergone ACLR, eccentric training is more effective than concentric training at improving knee flexion angle and other biomechanical deviations, as well as strength and patient-reported outcomes, using a matched perceived exertion dose.
Study Design:
Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.
Methods:
A total of 26 men, 10-16 weeks after hamstring tendon graft ACLR, were randomized to an eccentric training group or a concentric control group. Both groups trained 3 times a week for 8 weeks using the same isokinetic cycle ergometer in a matched studio environment. Exercise dose was matched in training frequency, time, progression, and intensity using a target rating of perceived exertion. Baseline and follow-up testing included questionnaires, dynamometer strength testing, and walk/run gait analysis.
Results:
Eccentric training increased knee (+2.1°; P = .022) and hip (+2.1°; P = .010) flexion angles more than concentric training but not more than the minimal clinically important difference of 3°. Very large asymmetries in baseline knee abduction moment (walk, −0.10 N·m/kg/m; run, −0.54 N·m/kg/m) had not changed in either group by follow-up. Knee valgus angle effects were mixed. Tibial rotation angle increased in both groups, but concentric training was more effective at promoting symmetry (P < .001). Both groups had similar increases in affected limb quadriceps strength and knee flexion moments during walk/run gait (by 20% to 33%). Hamstring strength increased in the eccentric group (+15.4%) but not the concentric group. Eccentric group limb forces were 33% to 70% higher than those of the concentric group, with a lower heart rate. Both groups had low pain scores throughout.
Conclusion:
For rehabilitation after ACLR, progressive eccentric cycle training was not more clinically effective than concentric training at a matched perceived intensity dose in male patients. This can guide exercise prescription for reducing gait and strength deviations of these patients.
Registration:
PACTR201602001449365 (Pan African Clinical Trials Registry), NHREC 4344 (South African).</description><subject>Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries - surgery</subject><subject>Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction</subject><subject>Bicycling</subject><subject>Biomechanical Phenomena</subject><subject>Biomechanics</subject><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>Gait</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Knee</subject><subject>Knee Joint - surgery</subject><subject>Ligaments</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Muscle Strength</subject><subject>Quadriceps Muscle</subject><subject>Sports medicine</subject><issn>0363-5465</issn><issn>1552-3365</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kc1L5TAUxYOMjE-dvashMJvZVNN8NstHcUbhgSDqtiTp7TPSNk7SLpyd_7kpzw8QXOXec3_3JOEgdFKS07JU6owwyQSXghJdKSHlHlqVQtCCMSm-odUyLpb5ATpM6YEQUipZfUcHjAkhNGcr9LzG12Zsw-D_Q4vrME4x9H0ub6I3PQ4dPncOsuodvoOY5rRAb0r95Ho_bnEXIl6PE0SfizrOzpsJ8MZvzZBJfA0ujGnK-uTDmNt7Y33vJ7O0x2i_M32CH6_nEbr9c35TXxSbq7-X9XpTuPyZqXDUcmrBUmoZbysHxkmltWRKCmZbaQmIVjNgpRQdJURTonilOtp2vCKWsyP0e-f7GMO_GdLUDD456HszQphTQzOtuNK8zOivT-hDmOOYX5cpzTQnQiyGZEe5GFKK0DWP0Q8mPjUlaZZ4ms_x5JWfr8azHaB9X3jLIwPFDkhmCx-3fmn4AlkHmBc</recordid><startdate>202103</startdate><enddate>202103</enddate><creator>Milandri, Giovanni</creator><creator>Sivarasu, Sudesh</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>Sage Publications Ltd</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TS</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>U9A</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202103</creationdate><title>A Randomized Controlled Trial of Eccentric Versus Concentric Cycling for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Rehabilitation</title><author>Milandri, Giovanni ; Sivarasu, Sudesh</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c365t-c2b42beb22b34d8ceac6799637653bd6b0e5d93e3165f2009207487f2df480b43</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries - surgery</topic><topic>Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction</topic><topic>Bicycling</topic><topic>Biomechanical Phenomena</topic><topic>Biomechanics</topic><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>Gait</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Knee</topic><topic>Knee Joint - surgery</topic><topic>Ligaments</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Muscle Strength</topic><topic>Quadriceps Muscle</topic><topic>Sports medicine</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Milandri, Giovanni</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sivarasu, Sudesh</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Physical Education Index</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The American journal of sports medicine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Milandri, Giovanni</au><au>Sivarasu, Sudesh</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A Randomized Controlled Trial of Eccentric Versus Concentric Cycling for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Rehabilitation</atitle><jtitle>The American journal of sports medicine</jtitle><addtitle>Am J Sports Med</addtitle><date>2021-03</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>49</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>626</spage><epage>636</epage><pages>626-636</pages><issn>0363-5465</issn><eissn>1552-3365</eissn><abstract>Background:
Persistent strength and biomechanical deviations remain after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Eccentric training may reduce these and associated reinjury or osteoarthritis risks.
Hypothesis:
For male patients who have undergone ACLR, eccentric training is more effective than concentric training at improving knee flexion angle and other biomechanical deviations, as well as strength and patient-reported outcomes, using a matched perceived exertion dose.
Study Design:
Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.
Methods:
A total of 26 men, 10-16 weeks after hamstring tendon graft ACLR, were randomized to an eccentric training group or a concentric control group. Both groups trained 3 times a week for 8 weeks using the same isokinetic cycle ergometer in a matched studio environment. Exercise dose was matched in training frequency, time, progression, and intensity using a target rating of perceived exertion. Baseline and follow-up testing included questionnaires, dynamometer strength testing, and walk/run gait analysis.
Results:
Eccentric training increased knee (+2.1°; P = .022) and hip (+2.1°; P = .010) flexion angles more than concentric training but not more than the minimal clinically important difference of 3°. Very large asymmetries in baseline knee abduction moment (walk, −0.10 N·m/kg/m; run, −0.54 N·m/kg/m) had not changed in either group by follow-up. Knee valgus angle effects were mixed. Tibial rotation angle increased in both groups, but concentric training was more effective at promoting symmetry (P < .001). Both groups had similar increases in affected limb quadriceps strength and knee flexion moments during walk/run gait (by 20% to 33%). Hamstring strength increased in the eccentric group (+15.4%) but not the concentric group. Eccentric group limb forces were 33% to 70% higher than those of the concentric group, with a lower heart rate. Both groups had low pain scores throughout.
Conclusion:
For rehabilitation after ACLR, progressive eccentric cycle training was not more clinically effective than concentric training at a matched perceived intensity dose in male patients. This can guide exercise prescription for reducing gait and strength deviations of these patients.
Registration:
PACTR201602001449365 (Pan African Clinical Trials Registry), NHREC 4344 (South African).</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><pmid>33555943</pmid><doi>10.1177/0363546520987566</doi><tpages>11</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0363-5465 |
ispartof | The American journal of sports medicine, 2021-03, Vol.49 (3), p.626-636 |
issn | 0363-5465 1552-3365 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2487747941 |
source | Access via SAGE; MEDLINE; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
subjects | Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries - surgery Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Bicycling Biomechanical Phenomena Biomechanics Clinical trials Gait Humans Knee Knee Joint - surgery Ligaments Male Muscle Strength Quadriceps Muscle Sports medicine |
title | A Randomized Controlled Trial of Eccentric Versus Concentric Cycling for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Rehabilitation |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-22T12%3A53%3A07IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20Randomized%20Controlled%20Trial%20of%20Eccentric%20Versus%20Concentric%20Cycling%20for%20Anterior%20Cruciate%20Ligament%20Reconstruction%20Rehabilitation&rft.jtitle=The%20American%20journal%20of%20sports%20medicine&rft.au=Milandri,%20Giovanni&rft.date=2021-03&rft.volume=49&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=626&rft.epage=636&rft.pages=626-636&rft.issn=0363-5465&rft.eissn=1552-3365&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/0363546520987566&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2487747941%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2493940554&rft_id=info:pmid/33555943&rft_sage_id=10.1177_0363546520987566&rfr_iscdi=true |