Reason Profiles for not Returning to Preinjury Activity Level Following Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction- A Latent Class Analysis With Subgroup Comparison of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures.

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine Pub Date : 2025-02-19 eCollection Date: 2025-02-01 DOI:10.1177/23259671241300300
Joseph D Lamplot, Erich J Petushek, Camryn B Petit, Shayla M Warren, Kim D Barber Foss, Alexis B Slutsky-Ganesh, Melanie Valencia, Charles D Kenyon, April L McPherson, John W Xerogeanes, Gregory D Myer, Jed A Diekfuss
{"title":"Reason Profiles for not Returning to Preinjury Activity Level Following Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction- A Latent Class Analysis With Subgroup Comparison of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures.","authors":"Joseph D Lamplot, Erich J Petushek, Camryn B Petit, Shayla M Warren, Kim D Barber Foss, Alexis B Slutsky-Ganesh, Melanie Valencia, Charles D Kenyon, April L McPherson, John W Xerogeanes, Gregory D Myer, Jed A Diekfuss","doi":"10.1177/23259671241300300","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Given the high proportion of athletes who do not return to sports (RTS) after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), strategies are needed to identify at-risk patients and optimize rehabilitation for successful RTS after ACLR.</p><p><strong>Purpose/hypothesis: </strong>This study used latent class analysis (LCA) to characterize a unique clustering of reasons why athletes do not return to their preinjury activity level after ACLR. We hypothesized that patients with high pain scores and high levels of fear would be less likely to return to their preinjury activity level.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All patients at a single institution who underwent primary ACLR between 2005 and 2021 were contacted to complete a survey via REDCap. Patients' ability to RTS and their preinjury activity level, reasons for inability to return to the preinjury activity level, and patient-reported outcome scores were collected from 981 patients. LCA was performed to identify and compare patterns among patients' reasons for not returning to the preinjury activity level.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 981 patients included, only 446 (45.5%) were fully able to return to their preinjury activity level. LCA categorized patients into 3 groups based on their reasons for not returning to preinjury activity levels: a high-function group (75.5%), which reported no barriers; a multisymptom group (16.1%), which cited pain, lack of strength, and instability; and a fear-limited group (8.4%), which reported fear as the sole reason. Among the high-function group, 86.2% reported RTS compared with <36.7% in the other classes. There was no difference in Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) subscales-including Pain, Symptoms, or Activities of Daily Living-between the high-function and fear-limited groups; however, the multisymptom group presented with the lowest scores in all KOOS subscales (<i>P</i> < .001). In addition, patient characteristics, the time from the index ACLR to the follow-up, and subsequent revision ACLR were similar between groups; however, the multisymptom profile demonstrated the highest proportion of allograft ACLR (<i>P</i> = .04) and secondary ipsilateral surgery (<i>P</i> < .001). Overall subjective knee grade (1-100) and Marx scores were highest in the high-function group, followed by fear-limited and multisymptom groups (<i>P</i> < .001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Patients were differentiated into 3 distinct classes after primary ACLR. Furthermore, those with patient-reported characteristics of pain, lack of strength, instability, or fear were significantly less likely to return to their preinjury activity level or sport.</p>","PeriodicalId":19646,"journal":{"name":"Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine","volume":"13 2","pages":"23259671241300300"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11872736/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23259671241300300","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Given the high proportion of athletes who do not return to sports (RTS) after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), strategies are needed to identify at-risk patients and optimize rehabilitation for successful RTS after ACLR.

Purpose/hypothesis: This study used latent class analysis (LCA) to characterize a unique clustering of reasons why athletes do not return to their preinjury activity level after ACLR. We hypothesized that patients with high pain scores and high levels of fear would be less likely to return to their preinjury activity level.

Study design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods: All patients at a single institution who underwent primary ACLR between 2005 and 2021 were contacted to complete a survey via REDCap. Patients' ability to RTS and their preinjury activity level, reasons for inability to return to the preinjury activity level, and patient-reported outcome scores were collected from 981 patients. LCA was performed to identify and compare patterns among patients' reasons for not returning to the preinjury activity level.

Results: Of the 981 patients included, only 446 (45.5%) were fully able to return to their preinjury activity level. LCA categorized patients into 3 groups based on their reasons for not returning to preinjury activity levels: a high-function group (75.5%), which reported no barriers; a multisymptom group (16.1%), which cited pain, lack of strength, and instability; and a fear-limited group (8.4%), which reported fear as the sole reason. Among the high-function group, 86.2% reported RTS compared with <36.7% in the other classes. There was no difference in Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) subscales-including Pain, Symptoms, or Activities of Daily Living-between the high-function and fear-limited groups; however, the multisymptom group presented with the lowest scores in all KOOS subscales (P < .001). In addition, patient characteristics, the time from the index ACLR to the follow-up, and subsequent revision ACLR were similar between groups; however, the multisymptom profile demonstrated the highest proportion of allograft ACLR (P = .04) and secondary ipsilateral surgery (P < .001). Overall subjective knee grade (1-100) and Marx scores were highest in the high-function group, followed by fear-limited and multisymptom groups (P < .001).

Conclusion: Patients were differentiated into 3 distinct classes after primary ACLR. Furthermore, those with patient-reported characteristics of pain, lack of strength, instability, or fear were significantly less likely to return to their preinjury activity level or sport.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine
Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
876
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine (OJSM), developed by the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine (AOSSM), is a global, peer-reviewed, open access journal that combines the interests of researchers and clinical practitioners across orthopaedic sports medicine, arthroscopy, and knee arthroplasty. Topics include original research in the areas of: -Orthopaedic Sports Medicine, including surgical and nonsurgical treatment of orthopaedic sports injuries -Arthroscopic Surgery (Shoulder/Elbow/Wrist/Hip/Knee/Ankle/Foot) -Relevant translational research -Sports traumatology/epidemiology -Knee and shoulder arthroplasty The OJSM also publishes relevant systematic reviews and meta-analyses. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信