The Impact of Gender on the Landing Error Scoring System: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 1.7 Q3 REHABILITATION

Physiotherapy Research International Pub Date : 2026-07-01 DOI:10.1002/pri.70230

Mohammad Seyedahmadi, Ahmad Ebrahimi Atri, Behnaz Shahtahmassebi, Hadi Akbari

{"title":"The Impact of Gender on the Landing Error Scoring System: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Mohammad Seyedahmadi, Ahmad Ebrahimi Atri, Behnaz Shahtahmassebi, Hadi Akbari","doi":"10.1002/pri.70230","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Women are more likely than men to experience injuries to the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL). Biomechanical differences, assessed using tools such as the Landing Error Scoring System (LESS), may contribute to this risk. The LESS does not directly influence ACL injury risk but helps identify individuals who might be at higher risk. However, conflicting findings in the literature prevent clear conclusions about sex-based differences in LESS scores. This study systematically reviews and meta-analyzes research examining the influence of sex on LESS scores.Methods: Four databases (ScienceDirect, PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus) were searched from 2009 (when LESS was introduced) to May 21, 2024. Only studies evaluating the impact of sex on LESS scores were included. Studies were screened for bias risk and critically appraised. A meta-analysis was performed utilizing a random-effects model, where sex served as the independent variable and LESS scores represented the dependent variable. The quality of evidence was assessed with the GRADE criteria. This study was registered with PROSPERO.Results: Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Females showed significantly higher LESS scores than males (p < 0.0001), with a mean difference of 0.62 errors. However, substantial heterogeneity was observed across studies, and the overall quality of evidence was rated as very low according to GRADE.Conclusions: Although a statistically significant difference between sexes was identified, the mean difference of 0.62 errors is not clinically meaningful. The findings should be interpreted with caution due to their high heterogeneity and very low-quality evidence. Furthermore, sex differences in LESS scores may be context-dependent and influenced by population characteristics and study conditions.Trial registration: PROSPERO (CRD 42023470540, October 19, 2023).","PeriodicalId":47243,"journal":{"name":"Physiotherapy Research International","volume":"31 3","pages":"e70230"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physiotherapy Research International","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pri.70230","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Women are more likely than men to experience injuries to the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL). Biomechanical differences, assessed using tools such as the Landing Error Scoring System (LESS), may contribute to this risk. The LESS does not directly influence ACL injury risk but helps identify individuals who might be at higher risk. However, conflicting findings in the literature prevent clear conclusions about sex-based differences in LESS scores. This study systematically reviews and meta-analyzes research examining the influence of sex on LESS scores.

Methods: Four databases (ScienceDirect, PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus) were searched from 2009 (when LESS was introduced) to May 21, 2024. Only studies evaluating the impact of sex on LESS scores were included. Studies were screened for bias risk and critically appraised. A meta-analysis was performed utilizing a random-effects model, where sex served as the independent variable and LESS scores represented the dependent variable. The quality of evidence was assessed with the GRADE criteria. This study was registered with PROSPERO.

Results: Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Females showed significantly higher LESS scores than males (p < 0.0001), with a mean difference of 0.62 errors. However, substantial heterogeneity was observed across studies, and the overall quality of evidence was rated as very low according to GRADE.

Conclusions: Although a statistically significant difference between sexes was identified, the mean difference of 0.62 errors is not clinically meaningful. The findings should be interpreted with caution due to their high heterogeneity and very low-quality evidence. Furthermore, sex differences in LESS scores may be context-dependent and influenced by population characteristics and study conditions.

Trial registration: PROSPERO (CRD 42023470540, October 19, 2023).

查看原文本刊更多论文

性别对着陆失误评分系统的影响：系统回顾与元分析。

背景：女性比男性更容易经历前交叉韧带（ACL）损伤。使用着陆误差评分系统（LESS）等工具评估的生物力学差异可能会导致这种风险。LESS并不直接影响前交叉韧带损伤的风险，但有助于识别可能处于高风险的个体。然而，文献中相互矛盾的发现阻止了关于LESS分数性别差异的明确结论。本研究系统地回顾和荟萃分析了性别对LESS分数影响的研究。方法：检索2009年（LESS引入时）至2024年5月21日的4个数据库（ScienceDirect、PubMed、Web of Science和Scopus）。仅包括评估性别对LESS分数影响的研究。对研究进行偏倚风险筛选和严格评价。采用随机效应模型进行meta分析，其中性别为自变量，LESS分数为因变量。采用GRADE标准评估证据质量。该研究已在PROSPERO注册。结果：16项研究符合纳入标准。结论：性别差异虽有统计学意义，但0.62的平均误差差异无临床意义。由于这些发现具有高度的异质性和非常低质量的证据，因此应谨慎解释。此外，LESS分数的性别差异可能与环境有关，并受到群体特征和研究条件的影响。试验注册：PROSPERO （CRD 42023470540, 2023年10月19日）。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Physiotherapy Research International REHABILITATION-

CiteScore

3.30

自引率

5.90%

发文量

期刊介绍： Physiotherapy Research International is an international peer reviewed journal dedicated to the exchange of knowledge that is directly relevant to specialist areas of physiotherapy theory, practice, and research. Our aim is to promote a high level of scholarship and build on the current evidence base to inform the advancement of the physiotherapy profession. We publish original research on a wide range of topics e.g. Primary research testing new physiotherapy treatments; methodological research; measurement and outcome research and qualitative research of interest to researchers, clinicians and educators. Further, we aim to publish high quality papers that represent the range of cultures and settings where physiotherapy services are delivered. We attract a wide readership from physiotherapists and others working in diverse clinical and academic settings. We aim to promote an international debate amongst the profession about current best evidence based practice. Papers are directed primarily towards the physiotherapy profession, but can be relevant to a wide range of professional groups. The growth of interdisciplinary research is also key to our aims and scope, and we encourage relevant submissions from other professional groups. The journal actively encourages submissions which utilise a breadth of different methodologies and research designs to facilitate addressing key questions related to the physiotherapy practice. PRI seeks to encourage good quality topical debates on a range of relevant issues and promote critical reflection on decision making and implementation of physiotherapy interventions.